H^Y 40

- »',.

V-* f '

8q|,

/<5^^/

CANONICITY

A COLLECTION OF EAELY TESTIMONIES-
TO THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF
THE NEW TESTAMENT

BASED ON

' KIRCHHOEER'S 'QUELLENSAMMLUNG'

A. H. CHARTERIS, D.D.
PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL CRITrCISM AND BIBLICAL ANTIQUITIES
IN THE UNIVERSITY OP EDINBURGH ; AND ONE
OF HER majesty's CHAPLAINS

WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS
EDINBURGH AND LONDON
MDCOCLXXX

TO

WILLIAM PURDIE DICKSON, D.D.
TO WHOSE FRIENDSHIP I HAVE OWED MUCH IN MY STUDIES
FOR MANY YEARS,
AND TO
JAMES DONALDSON, LL.D.
WHO NEVER SPARES HIS OWN TIME WHEN HB CAN HELP A FRIEND,
AND WHO HAS MADE ME FREE OF HIS VALUABLE LIBRARY
WHILE I WORKED AT THIS BOOK,
I DESIRE TO INSCRIBE IT,
WISHING IT WERE MORE WORTHY.

PEEFACE.

This work is based on Kirchhofer's ' Quellensammlung/
which has been out of print for some years. When I
began to prepare it, I hoped that Kirchhofer's text might
be such a basis that my part would mainly be to revise his
extracts, with such merely occasional supplement as recent
researches and discoveries might render necessary. But it
was soon evident that a reissue must contain much more
than this ; and from less to more, the work has grown
in my hands until it is substantially independent of the
' Quellensammlung,' although the text is still an attempt
to collect and classify, rather than to characterise, the pas
sages on which controversy turns. The footnotes have
relation to Kirchhofer's in only a few cases; the bio
graphical notes and the Introduction are new. There is
a great change in the extracts themselves. New dis
coveries of MSS, the shifting grounds of controversy, and
the special researches of individual scholars, have made
it indispensable for the student of theology to have ex
tracts compiled with a view to the state of criticism in
our own day.
In attempting to make this compilation, I have used

PEEFACE.

all the helps to which I had access. But it is a pleasant
duty to say even in the title-page that Kirchhofer's book
is after all the basis of this, and to record here my sense
of the obligation under which all students of the subject
during the last forty years have been laid by his im
partial and trustworthy collection of ancient testimonies.
Many of the other works that have been used are named
in the notes. I may say that my admiration of Lard
ner (on whom Kirchhofer almost exclusively relied) has
been increased with increasing knowledge of parts of the
wide field over which his splendid labours extended.
There is even now no book on the whole so indispensable
as his. Canon Westcott's works, which have made the
subject familiar in our country, are invaluable to every
student. I have also owed much throughout to the works
of Hilgenfeld, Reuss, Keim, Dr S. Davidson, and the
author of ' Supernatural Religion.' Frequent reference is
made to the well-known books and articles of Dr Donald
son, Bishop Lightfoot, and Dr Sanday ; and to the works
of Continental scholars, as Weizsacker, Wittichen, Volkmar,
Aub4 Overbeck, Waddington, Lipsius, Wieseler, Renan,
Gebhardt, Harnack, and Zahn.
The standard editions of the various authors have been
used so far as possible ; but as experience has taught me
how important it is to verify references easily, I have in
several of the more voluminous authors (as Origen, Athan
asius, &c.) stated the page at which the passage will be
found in Migne's edition, which is accessible to almost all
students. For Eusebius's Church History, the text of
Burton has been on the whole the standard in the very
numerous extracts, though Laemmer and Heinichen have

PEEFACE.

been in use. Attention is drawn in the footnotes to the
more important cases of doubtful readings in the extracts.
In regard to most of the Epistles of the New Testament,
a prefatory note in each case indicates the state of the con
troversy. In footnotes, also, will be found some biographical
notices of those authors to whom special reference is not
made in the Introduction. The Introduction itself seemed
to be indispensable, unless the footnotes were to be ex
tended beyond all reasonable limits. It was originally
intended to have a chapter on the avowed grounds of the
reception of the Canon in Christendom, especially since the
Reformation (see note, p. 33), but I have found that it
would be too long for this Introduction, unless it were too
meagre to be of use. The series of extracts, pp. 18-31, will
to a certain extent tell their own story. I ask permission
to refer tb an article on the subject of " Canonicity" in this
aspect in the 'Brit, and For. Evang. Review,' No. 75
(Feb. 1871). I regret not having in the Introduction an
examination of the testimony of Irenseus, but it may be
learned from the extracts in the text.
In the course of my work on this book, which has to my
great regret been interrupted by causes that I could not
control, I have had much help from many friends. Among
old students I may especially mention the Rev. Thomas
Nicol, B.D., to whom I owe a great part of a first colla
tion of the text of Kirchhofer with that of the standard
editions, the chapter on the Clementine Homilies, as also
the Analytical Index, and without whom this work would
never have been undertaken ; the Rev. James CouUie, B.D.,
who made the careful, and, I think, exhaustive Index ; the
Rev. J. A. M'Clymont, B.D. ; the Rev. William AUardyce,

10 PREFACE.
M.A. ; and the Rev. J. H. Crawford, M.A., who have all
kindly helped in collation and correction. From Mr R.
J. Cownie, M.A., I have had much willing work of the
same kind on the whole text after the first one hundred
pages. To Drs Donaldson, Sanday, Dickson, and Turpie,
and the Rev. Henry Cowan, B.D., I owe more than I
can here record in detail. To Professor Weizsacker,
Tubingen, the Rev. W. Presse! , Lustnau, and Professor
Christlieb, Bonn, for the encouragement which induced
me to undertake the work, and for cheering counsel
throughout, my best thanks are due, and I gladly tender
them. That there are occasional errors in the text and in the
many references I fear is only too likely, though every
efibrt has been used to avoid them. Those who have
tried to do the same kind of work will be most ready
to excuse slips and errors where they occur. I am aware
that absolute uniformity in the mode of reference to par
ticular authors has not been always maintained; but I
trust the passages may be usually found. It is my ambi
tion and my hope that the book may prove useful not
only to students of theology in the class-room, but also
to ministers and others desirous of investigating for
themselves the problems to which so much attention is
turned in our times. A. H. C.
October 1880.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION.

PAGE i

. Barnabas, ........
Epistle ascribed to Barnabas held in high estimation, ii — author a Jew,
but not the Apostle, iii — date of Epistle uncertain, iv— written to a
Greek Church by a Greek, v— relation to John's Gospel, Clement,
aTid the 0. T., vi — parallel passages with Fourth Gospel, vii.
, Clement of Eome, ....... viii
First Epistle.— Works ascribed to Clement, viii— MSS of Epistle, viii
and ix — who Clement was, ix — evidence of his writing the Epistle ;
age of the Epistle, x — evidence as to Canon of N. T., xii — quota
tions of 0. T., xiii — quotations of N. T., xiv — doctrinal teaching,
xvi — ^relation to the truths of Christianity, xvii.
Seco-nd Epistle. — A Homily, not by Clement, xviii— place and date, xix
— testimony to Scripture, xx — conclusion as to, xxi — list of N. T.
references, xxii — other Epistles ascribed to Clement, xxiii.
Hbkmas, ......... xxiv
Characteristics of, xxiv — reception in the early Church ; MSS of ; state
of text, xxv.
Ignatius, ....... . xxvi
Number of Epistles, xxvi — editions, xxvii — objections to all the re
censions, xxix — classified quotations in the Ignatian letters, xxx.
Polycarp, ........ xxxiv
The Epistle and the author, xxxiv — date of Poly carp's death and of the
Epistle, xxxv — quotations from N. T., xxxvi — classified quotations
from the Epistle and from the Martyrdom of Polycarp, xxxviii.
Papias, ......... xii
Papias and his treatise, xii — his date, xliii — his testimony to Matthew
and Mark, xliv. Note on the tradition of John in Ephesus.
Basilides, ........ xlvii
Date and system of Basilides, xlvii — his relation to the Gospels, xlix —
does Hippolytus quote Basilides himself ? 1 — author of ' Supernatural
Religion ' ou Basilides, li. Note on the system of Basilides.

12 CONTENTS.
8. Justin Maktyk, ........ liii
Justin a link between Apostolic age and Irenaeus, liii — his extant writ-
iugs, lv — substantial agreement with N. T. ; characteristics of his
mode of quotation, Ivii — agreement with Apocryphal writers, lix —
conclusions, Ix — use of John's Gospel ; use of Paul's Epistles, Ixii.
9. Clementine Homilies, ....... Ixiii
Homilies aud Recognitions, Ixiii — use of Matthew, lxiv — of Luke and
Mark, Ixvi — of John ; of Apocryphal Gospels, Ixvii — of Acts and
Pauline Epistles, ixviii.
10. Gospel of the Hbbeews, .... . Ixviii
The problem, Ixviii — Nazarenes aud Ebionites, Ixix — their Gospels, Ixx
— Jerome's conflicting statements, Ixxi — possible reconciliation of
them, Ixxii — the more important Clementine quotations, ixxiii — the
EMonite Gospel, Ixxiv — conclusion as to Gospel of the Hebrews, Ixxv
— Gospel of the Egyptia'ns, lxxvi.
11. Heqesippus, ........ Ixxvii
Eusebius on Hegesippus, Ixxvii — a champion of Christianity, lxxviii —
his allusions to the canonical books, Ixxix.
12. MUKATOEIAN CanON, ....... Ixxix
Where fouud, Ixxix — value of the fragment, Ixxx — summary of, Ixxxi.
13. Clement of Alexandria, ...... Ixxxi
Date of Clement, Ixxxi — works, quotations, views of Gnosis, Ixxxii.
14. Origen, ......... Ixxxv
Date of Origen, writings, and testimony, Ixxxv.
15. The Paschal Contkoveesy, ...... Ixxxv
What it was, Ixxxv— Tiibingen use of it, Ixxxvi — (1) the authorities
from whom -we learn its nature and progress, Ixxxvii — (2) the contro
versy and the combatants at successive stages, Ixxxviii — first period,
Ixxxix — second period, xci — third period (according to Eusebius),
xcii — the statements iu ' The Paschal Chronicle, ' xciii — conclusion,
xcv.
16. Apocryphal Liter.4.tuee, . . ... xcvi
The claim and the dates of N. T. Apocrypha, xcvi — extra-canonical
books not all heretical, xcvii — various meanings of " Gospel " in
N. T. Apocrypha, xcviii— division of Apocrypha into Gospels, Acts,
Epistles, Apocalypses, xcix — Apocryphal Gospels: Protevangel, c —
Gospel of Thomas ; of Nicodemus, ci — Gospels iu names of Apostles ;
Gospels named after those who used them, cii — Harmonies, miscel
laneous ; all imply the canonical books, ciii — discrepancies in differ
ent editions of Apocryphal Gospels proofs of their want of author
ity, civ — how the names perished from memory; Apocryphal Acts,
cv — purpose of the Acts, cvi— collections by Leucius and by Abdias ;
Apocryphal Epistles ; Apocryphal Apocalypses, cvii.
17. The Eoueth Gospel, ....... cviu
Comments on the catena of testimony in the text, cviii — modern views
of the Fourth Gospel, cx— internal evidence that the Gospel was
written by an eyewitness, cxi — by a Jew of Palestine, cxii — by an
enlightened disciple ; a man of calm authority ; one with a definite
purpose, cxiii — objections stated and considered, cxiv-cxvi.
Analytical and Chronological Index, ..... cxvii

CONTENTS. 13

I.— OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION OF SACRED BOOKS.
1. The Peshito Syriac. Second century, ..... 1
Wants Apocalypse, Jude, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John.
2. The Old Latin. Second century, ... .2
Wants Hebrews, 2 Peter, and (perhaps) James.
3. Muratorian Canon. Second century, a.d. 160-170, ... 3
Text according to Tregelles ; text as probably to be read ; testimony
to Gospels, thirteen Epistles of Paul, Acts (as Luke's), at least two
Epistles of John, Jude, and Apocalypse ; Apocalypse of Peter.
4. Canon of Origen (from Eus. H. E. VI. 25), a.d. 184-253, . . 8
Four Gospels, Pauline Epistles, Apocalypse, 1 John, 1 Peter, and (as not
accepted by all) 2 and 3 John, and 2 Peter ; Epistle to Hebrews
characterised, and its authorship discussed (James and Jude else
where included by Origen).
5. Canon of Eusebius (H. E. III. 25, about a.d. 260-340), . . 10
Accepted — Four Gospels ; Acts, Epp. of Paul, 1 John, 1 Peter, aud
(perhaps) the Apocalypse.
Disputed — James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John.
Spurious — ^Apocalypse (perhaps).
6. Codex Vaticanus. Fourth century, ..... 12
Contains N. T. canon so far, but the MS is imperfect.
7. Codex Sinaitious, Fourth century, . . . . .12
Canonical books of N. T. , with Acts in a peculiar position ; also Barna
bas and Hermas.
8. Canon of Athanasius. Middle of fourth century, . . 13
Exaotiy the same as our canon.
9. Synopsis ascribed to Athanasius, . . . 15
List of 0. T. and N. T. books ; the Apocrypha mentioned ; narratives
of the composition of the Four Gospels.

II.— TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON (of later date).
1. Canon of the Laodicene Council, A.D. 364, .... 18
Apocalypse omitted.
2. Canon of Cyril of Jerusalem. Middle of fourth century, . 19
Apocalypse omitted.
3. Canon of Third Council of Carthage, A. D. 397, ....
Books of N. T. first enumerated.
4. Canon of Epiphanius, bishop of Constantia (born a.d. 367, died a.d. 403), 21
Includes Wisdom of Solomon and Sirach.
5. Canon of Jerome (born A.D. 329, died A.D. 420), ... 21
Epistle to Hebrews, in the opinion of the majority, not St Paul's.
6. Augustine (bom a.d. 354, died a.d. 430), .... 22
Accepts received canon of N. T. , but doubts authenticity of Hebrews.
7. Chrysostom (born A.D. 347, died a.d. 407), .... 23
Omits Apocalypse, and mentions three Catholic Epp.

20

14 CONTENTS.
8. Codex Alexandrinus. End of fourth century, .... 23
Contains our canon with Clement's Epp., and, though in a different
grade, the Psalms of Solomon.
9. Gelasius, a.d. 492, ....... 28
His own decree contains the Canonical N. T. ; a recension (Damasus)
contains details ascribing two Epp. of John to Presbyter John ; an
other recension (Hormisdas) gives a list of heretical and schismatical
books.
10. Apostolical Constitutions. Fourth century, .... 25
Canonical books enumerated, and Apociyphal books mentioned.
11. Canones Ecclesiastici qui dicuutur Apostolorum. Fourth century, . 26
Books of Scripture enumerated, including in the N. T. some Apocrypha,
the two Epp. of Clement, and the Siara-yai sent through Clement.
The Apocalypse is not included in the N. T.
12. Codex Claromontanus. Probably sixth century, ... 27
Containing the N. T. as in the Canon ; but also a list which wants
Thessalonians, Hebrews, and Philippians ; and adds Pastor, Actus
Pauli, Rev. Petri.
13. Anastasius Sinaita, died a.d. 599, ..... 28
Divides the books into three classes — (1) Biblical ; (2) extra- Biblical ;
(3) Apocryphal.
14. Trullan Council, a.d. 692, ...... 29
Approves of Athanasius and of Apostolical Canons (which contradict
each other).
15. Nicephorus, died A.D. 828, ...... 29
Apocalypse ranked among Antilegomeua ; Apocryphal books men
tioned.
16. Canon of Council of Trent, A.D. 1546, ..... 80
Enumerates books of Scripture, with Apocrypha of 0. T. ; text of Scrip
ture fixed according to the Vulgate ; Scripture and tradition the rule
of faith.
17. Old Catholic Union Theses, 1874, ..... 32
Scripture the primary rule ; tradition also authoritative.
18. Cyril Lukar's Confession. Suggested to the Greek Church, a.d. 1629-33, 33
Canon of N. T. as in Protestant Churches ; supremacy of Scripture.
19. Councilof Jerusalem, A.D. 1672, ...... 34
Commonly accepted in the Greek Church till 1889 ; Scripture and the
Church equal.
20. Philaret's Longer Catechism, a.d. 1839, ..... 35
Number of books stated ; Divine revelation in two channels — holy tra
dition and Hol.y Scripture — the latter needful to keep the Divine
revelation unchangeable. Lutheran Testimony.
21. Formula of Concord, a.d. 1577, ..... 36
Art. i. 1, 2, 7, 8 ; Scripture the sole rule of faith.

CONTENTS, 15

Reformed Confessions.
22. Confession of Basle, A.D. 1536, ... .37
Canonical Scripture the only rule of life.
23. Confessio Helvetica Posterior, a.d. 1566, . . , 38
Scripture the Word of God, and self-authorising.
24. Confessio Fidei Gallicana, a.d. 1559, ..... 38
Canonical Scripture the rule of faith, and evidenced by the inner witness
of the Spirit.
25. Old Scottish Confession, a.d. 1560, . . . . 29
Scripture does not owe its authority to men.
26. Confessio Bohoemica, a.d. 1535, ...... 39
Scripture received by the Fathers true and most certain.
27. Angliean Articles of Religion, A.D. 1562, . .... 40
All books canonical which were never doubted, and are commonly re
ceived ; Apocrypha may be read for instruction.
28. Westminster Confession of Faith, 1643-47, .... 40
Scriptures given by inspiration ; have authority from God ; many argu
ments evidencing them to be the Word of God ; but full persuasion of
their infallible truth and divine authority due to the inward work of
the Holy Spirit.

III.— THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
1. Ignatius (date ? seep, xxvi), ...... 42
Quotations regarding "the Gospel " and "the Apostles."
2. Melito, A.D. 170 (Eus. H. E. IV. 26), ..... 43
A new collection of books was known distinct from the 0. T.
3. Dionysius of Corinth, a.d. 170 (Eus. H. E. IV. 23), . . 44
Speaks of al KvpMKoi ypa<l>ai.
4, IrensBus (about A.D. 180-190, see note, p. 422), (I. 3. 6 ; I. 6. 3 ; II.
35. 4; III. 4. 1. 2, Ep. ad Florin.) ..... 45
Speaks of " evangelical " and "apostolical" writings ; calls the N. T.
Scriptures, &c.
5. Tertullian, born A.D. 160; died between A.D. 220-40, ... 46
Deprcescript, 30, 32, 33— Seeds of Gnostic heresies condemned in N. T.,
36_Appeal to churches to which Apostolic Epp. had been written,
37, 38 ; heretics have no right to appeal to Scripture ; Marcion muti
lated Scripture ; Valentinus perverted it, though using a "complete
instrument."
Adv. Marcionem, IV. 1, Marcion's Antithesis; Apolog., c. 3, loyalty
of Christians; De Monog., c 11, the "authentic Greek;" Adv.
Praxean, c. 15, the Old and New Testaments.
6. Clement of Alexandria (head of catechetical school, A.D. 190-203), . 50
Passages speaking of tJ> ebayyeKiov, i dirdrrToKos, al KupiaKol ypa^al, 7/
Kvpiov (pwv^, &c.
7. Origen (Hom. on Gen. xiii. 2, on Josh. vii. 2), . • 51
Enumerates N. T. books.
8. Lactantius (Institut. IV. 20), died a.d. 325, . 52
Division of Old and New Testaments.

16 CONTENTS.

IV.— THE GOSPELS.
1. Papias (Eus. H. E. IIL 36), a.d. 70 to a.d. 150, ... 58
From Eusebius — Papias and Polycarp.
From Eusebius and Jerome — John survived till the times of Trajan ;
Papias and Polycarp were his hearers.
Irenaeus on Papias's millenarian views.
Eusebius on Papias and his mode of proceeding with his "Exegeses,"
the Logia.
Jerome on the same.
Later writers on Papias.
2. Justin Martyr, ..... . . .59
General references to authorities and memoirs.
Passages in which he expressly cites his authorities. (Compare below,
p. 125.)
3. Letter to Diognetus, c. 11, . . . . . .65
Mentions eiayye\ia and &-!r6a-To\oi as used in Christian Church. See
note.
4. The Evangelists of Trajan's time (Eus. H. E. III. 37), ... 65
Speak of 9etos \6yos, 6e7a eiia-yyeKia, &c.
5. Quadratus (Eus. H. E. IV. 3), . . . . . . 66
Survival to his time (Hadrian) of some on whom miracles had been
wrought.
6. Irenaeus, ......... 66
III. 1. Sole authority of Scriptures ; composition of the Four Gospels.
III. 11, 7. Gospels used by Ebionites, Marcion, Valentinus, &c.
III. 11, 8, 9. Four Gospels ; the probable number; even heretics need
Gospels; Montanists? Gospel of Truth.
7. The Presbyters, ... .... 71
Iren. IV. 32, 1. One God of Old Testament and of New; John's Gospel.
II. 22, 5. Our Lord lived to old age.
V. 36, 1, 2. Grades of spiritual existence and reward.
8. Tatian (Eus. H. E. IV. 29), a.d. 170, ..... 72
His Diatessaron ; Theodoret found more than 200 copies of Tatian's
book.
9. Theophilus, a.d. 180-193, ...... 73
Puts prophets and apostles on the same level as inspired ; wrote com
mentaries on the four Gospels.
10. Clement of Alexandria (Eus. H. E. VI. 14), .... 74
Made expositions of all Scripture, including the Antilegomeua ; origin
of Mark's Gospel ; also Gospel of Egyptians.
11. Tertullian, . . . . . . . .75
Against Marcion, IV. cc. 2, 3, 4, 5 ; Marcion's mode of proceeding ;
his Gospel later than the canonical St Luke ; John the first bishop ;
Mark Peter's interpreter ; Luke's Gospel ascribed to Paul.
12. Origen, ......... 81
Contra Cels. III. 473, characteristics of the Gospels ; in Iaw. III. 932,
the true Gospels, the lost, the heretical, and the Apocryphal Gos
pels; in Joh. I. i, 6, the Gospel the "first-fruits;" ibid. V. 98, the
four Gospels one.

CONTENTS. 17
18. Dionysius of Alexandria, Ep. atZ .BasiM. (a.d. 247-265), . . 86
On disputes as to the time of Christ's resurrection, says the four Gos
pels agree in essentials.
14. Eusebius (H. E. III. 24) (about a.d. 260 to about a.d. 340), . . 87
John's narrative begins earlier in the ministry than the synoptists;
John's first Ep. undisputed ; the others and the Apoc. under discus
sion ; Dem. Evang. III. 5, Matthew's Gospel and John's agree ;
Mark's Gospel is "Peter's memoirs;" impossibility of forging such
Gospels ; the (supposititious ?) testimony of Josephus.
15. Epiphanius (Haer. II. 1. 51), ..... 95
Matthew wrote in Hebrew ; Mark one of the seventy-two disciples ;
Luke wrote in some connection with Paul ; John wrote after he was
ninety-two years old against " Cerinthus, Ebion, and the rest."
16. Jerome, .... .... 99
Comment, in Mat. Proxm., the four evangelists and the false and apo
cryphal Gospels ; the four animal-symbols of the evangelists ; Prcef.
in I V. Evang. , the order of the four evangelists.

v.— THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS AND THE SYNOPTISTS.
1. Barnabas (date ? see p. iii), . . . . .102
Quotation of Mat. xxii. 14, with is yiypairrai ; Mat. ix. 13.
2. Clement of Rome (a.d. 93), ..... 104
First Epistle. — C. 13, passage parallel with the Sermon on the Mount ;
u. 15, 1, quotation of 0. T. through St Mark.
Second Epistle. — A. Citations agreeing with the synoptists.
B. Citations not agreeing with the synoptists.
3. Hermas (a.d. 142), . . . . . . . .108
Passages reminding us of the Gospels ; Mand. I. 1, quoted by Irenaeus
as il ypatptfi.
4. Ignatius, ........ 110
Passages resembling the synoptists in details ; Smyrn. III. 1, from
Luke xxiv. 36, John xx. 22, or apocryphal source ?_
5. Polycarp (date a.d. 154 ? see p. xxxiv), .... 112
Phil. c. 2, 3, parallel with Sermon on Moimt (see also Clement, p. 105).
6. Martyrdom of Polycarp (A.D. 154?), . . ... .113

VL— GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.
(Compare also Sections IV. and V.)
1. Papias (Eus. H. E. III. 40),  114
Matthew wrote ra K6yia in Hebrew.
2. Justin Martyr, . . . . . . . .114
A. Citations and references fouud in our Gospels.
B. Citations wholly or partially not in our Gospels.
3. Letter to Diognetus, ....... 127
C. 9, Mat. vi. 25. B

io CONTENTS.
4. Hegesippus, . ...... 127
References to his work and doctrines in Eusebius and Photius.
5. Tatian,  129
Quotations of an Encratite character preserved by Clem. Alex.
6. Irenaeus, ......... 1^9
Matthew wrote for Hebrews, &c.
7. Athenagoras, ........ 131
Quotations from the Sermon on the Mount to vindicate the character of
Christians.
8. Theophilus, ........ 132
Quotation from the Sermon on the Mount.
9. Pantaenus, ......... 133
Pantaenus found among the Indians Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, taken
to them by Bartholomew.
10. Clement of Alexandria, .... . . 134
Matthew gives the genealogy of Mary.
11. Tertullian, ........ 134
To the same effect as Clem. Alex.
12. Clementine Homilies, . . . . . .134
Passages showing various degrees of agreement with the canon.
13. Origen, ......... 136
Matthew written for the Hebrews. Various readings and their origin.
14. Julius Africaiius, ........ 137
Discrepancy in the genealogies in Matthew and Luke.
15. Eusebius, ......... 138
Matthew wrote in Hebrew (irarpfy yKcirri^), and in the Greek used
oiKsit^ iKB6(Tet.
16. Cyril of Jerusalem, ....... 139
Matthew wrote iu Hebrew.
17. Epiphanius, ........ 139
Matthew's Gospel was called "according to the Hebrews," because
written in Hebrew.
18. Jerome, ......... 139
Matthew wrote in Hebrew ; the translator into Greek not kuown ; the
original Hebrew was in Caesarea in Jerome's time ; Jerome saw the
book in Bercsa.

VIL— GOSPEL OF MARK.
(See Note, p. 141.)
1. Papias, .... . 141
Mark Peter's interpreter (Ipjmji'fuT^j).
2. Barnabas, Clement, Hennas, .... .142
Resurrection and ascension of Christ.
3. Justin Martyr, ........ 143
Christ a carpenter; the memoirs of Peter (?) ; special references to the
disputed verses, Mark xvi. 9-20.
4. Irenteus, ......... 145
Mark was Peter's "interpreter and follower."

CONTENTS.

19

5.

Athenagoras, ... ...
Eeference Mark x. 11,. 6.

146

6.

Muratorian Canon, ......
See before, p. 5.

146

7.

Clement of Alexandria, ......
Narrative ofthe composition of Mark's Gospel (see note, p. 147).

146

8.

Hippolytus, .......
Mark the Ko\o$oSdKTv\os.

147

9.

Tertullian, ... ...
Mark Peter's interpreter.

148

10.

Origen, ........

148

11.

Clementine Homilies, .....

148

12.

Eusebius, ..... . .
Eusebius says Mark's Gospel is "Memoirs of Peter's Discourses."

148

13.

Epiphanius, Mark, Peter's follower, wrote his Gospel in Rome.

149

14.

Jerome, .......
Jerome's version of Mark's relation to Peter.

149

15.

Special testimonies to Mark xvi. 9-20,

150

VIIL— GOSPEL OF LUKE.
(See Notes, pp. 154, 163, 164, 165, 166.)
1. Bamabas, .
2. Clement of Rome, .
3. Hermas,
4. Protevangelium Jacobi,
5. Justin Martyr,
References especially to the early years of Christ.
6. Letter of Christians of Vienne and Lyons,
7. Irenaeus, ...
Luke was Paul's axdhovBos, and his Gospel is what Paul preached (see
note).
8. Tatian,
9. Athenagoras, . . . .
10. Theophilus,
11. Clement of Alexandria,
12. Tertullian, ...
Paul was Luke's illuminator.
13. Julius Africanus, . ...
14. Origen, ...... . .
Luke and Mark were of the seventy-two disciples ; some say Luke was
Lucius, Rom. xvi. 21.
15. Clementine Homilies, . ...
16. Eusebius, .......
Luke an Antiochene ; his relations to Paul.
17. Epiphanius, ...
18. Jerome, Luke a physician.

154155
155156
156 158159

162162 162162
162 163163

163164165165

20

CONTENTS.

10. 11. 12.13.
14.15.16.17.
18.

19.20.
21. 22.
23.24.25.26.
27. 28.

IX.— GOSPEL OF JOHN
(See Introduction, Chap. XVII.)
Papias, ......... 167
Used 1 John; another Papias of fourteenth century ; MS reference of
uncertain date.
Barnabas, . . ...... 168
References and coincidences (note, p. 170).
Clement of Rome (echoes), .... . 170
2 Clem, (quotations) ; Jerome's citation of 1 Clem.
Ignatius, . .... 171
Basilides, ..... ... 178
Reference to John i., ii.
Acts of Pilate, .... . .173
John V. 2 (see note, p. 174).
Polycarp, ......... 17.4
Martyrdom of Polycarp, ..... .174
Hermas, .... . . . 174
Note, p. 175.
Justin Martyr, ........ 176
Quotations aud references (see note, p. 178).
Letter to Diognetus, . . . . . . .179
Acts of Paul and Thecla, ..... . 180
Letter of the Christians of Vienne and Lyons, , . 180
Tatian, ......... ISO
Athenagoras, . . . . .181
Theophilus, .... .182
Quotation by name.
Muratorian Fragment, ... . . 182
Irenaeus, ......... 182
John survived till Trajan's time ; wrote his Gospel in Ephesus ; op
posed Cerinthus.
Polycrates, . . . ... 183
Clement of Alexandria, . .... 184
Tertullian, . . . . . 184
Clementine Homilies, ... . . 184
John iii., ix., x.
Valentinus and Ptolemsens, . . ... 185
Ongen. ... ¦ • . . 185
Dionysius of Alexandria, . . . . . jgg
Eusebius, ... . . • . 185
Epiphanius, ... . , _ jgO
Why Johu wrote ; the Alogi.
Jerome, ......... 137
John supplemented the synoptists ; lived till Trajan's time.

CONTENTS.

21

THE PASCHAL CONTROVERSY.
Appendix to Testimonies to John's Gospel.
1. Eusebius (H. E. V. 22, 25), ...
Narrative of the controversy in the days of Victor ; Irenaeus's reminis
cences of Polycarp and Anicetus in connection with it, ibid. , IV. 26 ;
reference to Melito's work.
2. Hippolytus (Ref. H«r. VIII. 18), .
The observers of the 14th day at issue with the Church.
3. The Paschal Chronicle, 5, 6, &c., ......
Christ slain ou the 14th; alleged quotations from Hippolytus, Appolli-
narius, Clement of Alexandria.
4. Epiphanius, ........
Various references to the Quartodecimans.

189192 193
195

X.— THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.

1. Barnabas, .

yji: XJ.J.J:. .«.i vyjjj, jjjuo.

196

2. Clement of Rome, .

196

3. Hermas,

196

4. Ignatius, .

196

5. Polycarp, .

197
6. Martyrdom of Polycarp, .
197
7. Papias,
197
Supplementary traditions.
8. Dionysius of Corinth,
197
9. Justin Martyr,
198
10. Letter to Diognetus,
198
11. Letter from the Churches of Vienne and Lyons, .
198
12. Hegesippus,
199
13. Syriac and Old Latin Versions,
199
14. Muratorian Canon,
199
15. Acts of Paul and Thecla, .
199
16. Irenaius (III. 14, 15),
200
Luke the companion of Paul.
17. Tatian,
202
18. Athenagoras,
.
202
19. Clement of Alexandria,
.
202
Luke wrote Acts, and translated
Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews.
20. Tertullian,
203
Luke the author.
21. Clementine Homilies,
203
22. Clementine Recognitions, .
204
Various references, one to Paul as in Acts ix. 1, 2.
28. Origen,
205
Luke tbe writer of Acts.
24. Apostolical Constitutions,
205
Luke the author.
25. Eusebius, .
205
26. Jerome,
206
Note on objections to the book.
22

CONTENTS.

XL— THE EPISTLES.
Eusebius (H. E. III. 3), .
The works of Peter (his Epistles, Acts, Gospel, Preaching, Apocalypse) ;
and of Paul (Hebrews disputed. Acts not accepted, the Shepherd of
Hermas controverted).

207

XIL— THE EPISTLES OF PAUL.
1. Clement of Eome, ........ 209
Paul at the limit of the west, &c.
2. Tatian (Eus. H. E. IV. 29), . . . .210
Amended Paul.
3. Caius, ......... 210
Did not count Hebrews among Paul's Epistles.
4. Syriac and Old Latin Versions, ...... 210
5. Muratorian Canon, . . ... 211
6. Origen, ...... . 211
7. Eusebius, ......... 211
Paul's history after the end of Acts, as indicated in 2 Timothy, and
stated by other writers.
8. Jerome, ......... 213
On the same subject, and on Hebrews.

XIIL— EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

1. Barnabas, .
2. Clement of Rome, .

215 215

First Epistle ; Second
3. Ignatius, .
4. Polycarp, .
5. Justin Martyr,
And note.

Epistle.

216
216217

6. Letter to Diognetus, .....
7. Letter of the Christians of Vienne and Lyons,
8. Syriac aud Old Latin Versions, ....
9. Muratoriali Canon, ....

217
218218
218

10. The Presbyters, . .
Of Irenaeus.

218

11. Tatian,
12. Irenaeus, Paul by name.

219219

13. Athenagoras,
14. Theophilus,
15. Clement of Alexandria,

219220 220
16. Tertullian,
220
On Rom. xv. and xvi.
17. Origen, .......
MSS varying in allocating xvi. 25-27. Note.
221
CONTENTS.

23

XIV.— FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.

1. Barnabas, ....
2. Clement of Rome, ....
Paul by name, &c.
3. Hermas,
4. Ignatius, .
5. Polycarp, ....
6. Martyrdom of Polycarp,
7. Justin Martyr,
8. Letter to Diognetus,
9. The Presbyters, ...
Irenaeus.
10. Hegesippus, ...
On 1 Cor. ii. 9.
11. Syriac and Old Latin Versions and Muratorian Canon,
12. Tatian, ......
13. Athenagoras, . . , .
14. Theophilus, ....
15. Irenaeus, ....
16. Clement of Alexandria, ¦ .
17. Tertullian, 

222222224
224225
225225226
226
227 227227
228
229229229
229

XV.— SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.

1. Clement of Rome, . . . .

230

2. Ignatius, ......

230

3. Polycarp, .... ...

230

4. Letter to Diognetus,

230

5. Athenagoras, ......

231

6. Theophilus, .......

231

7. Syriac aud Old Latin Versions and Muratorian Canon, .

231

8. Irenaeus, . . .....

231

Paul by name.

9, The Presbyters, .......

231

Paul by name.

10. Clement of Alexandria, ......

232

11. Tertullian, ... ...

232

XVI.-GALATIANS.

1. Barnabas, ......

233

2. Clement of Rome, . . ....

238

3. Ignatius, .... . .

233

4. Polycarp, ... . .

233

5. Justin Martyr, .......

234

6. Letter to Diognetus, . . ...

234

7. Syriac and Old Latin Versions aud Muratorian Canon,

234

24

CONTENTS.

8. Tatian,

234

9. Athenagorais,

235
10. Irenaeus, .
285
11. Clement of Alexandria,
285
12. Acts of Paul and Thecla,
236
13. Tertullian,
236
14. Clementine Homilies,
236
XVII.— EPHESIANS.
1. Bamabas, ......
Note on genuineness.
2. Clement of Rome, .....
8. Hermas, . ....
4. Ignatius, .
5. Polycarp, ... . .
The Epistle is "Scripture."
6. Syriac and Old Latin Versions and Muratorian Canon,
7. Irenaeus, ......
Names Paul to the Ephesians.
8. Theophilus,
9. Clement of Alexandria,
10. Tertullian, To Ephesians, not to Laodiceans.
11. Clementine Homilies,
12. Origen, . . ...
To the Ephesians.
13. Epiphanius, .....
On Marcion's Laodiceans compare Tertullian's reference, and see note,
p. 242.
14. Jerome, ..... . . .
287
238
238239
239 240
240240240241
241241
241
242
XVIII. —PHILIPPIANS.
1. Clement of Rome, ........ 243
2. Ignatius, ......... 243
3. Polycarp, . . ...... 244
"The blessed and glorified (?) Paul."
4. Martyrdom of Polycarp, ... ... 244
5. Justin Martyr, ..... . . 244
6. Letter to Diognetus, ..... . 245
7. Letter of Christians of Vienne and Lyons, . . . 245
8. Irenaeus, ......... 245
Paul to Philippians.
9. Theophilus, ........ 245
According to Jerome, quoted Philippians in his Commentary on the
four Gospels in one.
10. Clement of Alexandria, ....... 246
11. Tertullian, ..... . . 246
CONTENTS.

25

XIX.— COLOSSIANS.

Note on Epistle, ...

247

1. Barnabas, ...

248

2. Clement of Rome, .

248

3. Ignatius, ......

248

4. Polycarp, ....

248

5. Justin Martyr, .....

248

6. Tatian, ......

249

7. Syriac and Old Latin Versions aud Muratorian Canon,

249

8. Irenaeus, ......

249

9. Theophilus,

249

10. Clement of Alexandria,

260

11. Tertullian, . . ...

250

XX.— FIRST THESSALONIANS.

Note ou Epistle, .
1. Barnabas, .
2. Clement of Rome, .
3. Ignatius, . . . •
4. Polycarp, ...
5, Syriac, Old Latin, aud Muratorian Canon,
6. Irenaeus, .....
7. Clement of Alexandria,
8. Tertullian,

251
251251251 251251252252252

XXL— SECOND THESSALONIANS.

Note on Epistle,
1. Barnabas, .
2. Polycarp, .
3. Justin Martyr,
4. Irenaeus, .
5. Clement of Alexandria,
6. Tertullian,

253 253
253253253
254 254

XXII.— FIRST TIMOTHY.

Note on the Pastoral Epistles,

255

1. Barnabas, .....

255

2. Clement of Rome, ...

255

3. Ignatius, ......

256

4. Polycarp, ......

257

5. Letter to Diognetus, . . . . ¦

257

6. Letter of the Christians of Vienne and Lyons,

257

7. Justin Martyr, . ...

258

8. Hegesippus, ....

258

26

CONTENTS.

9. Syriac, Old Latin, and Muratorian Canon,

259

10. Athenagoras, ... . .

259

11. Theophilus, . .

259

12. Irenaeus, .......

259

18. Clement of Alexandria, ....

259

14. Tei-tullian, .... . .

260

15. Jerome, ....

260

XXIIL— SECOND TIMOTHY.

1. Barnabas, .......

262

2. Clement of Rome, .

262
3. Ignatius, .
262
4. Polycarp, .
262
5. Athenagoras,
263
6. Irenaeus,
263
7. Clement of Alexandria,
263
8. Tertullian,
264
9. Origen,
.
264
10. Eusebius, .
264
(See also p. 211.)
XXIV. -TITUS.
1. Barnabas, .......
266
2. Clement of Rome,
266
3. Ignatius, .
266
4. Irenaeus,
266
5. Tatian,
267
6. Athenagoras,
267
7. Theophilus,
267
8. Justin Martyr,
267
9. Clement of Alexandria,
267
10. Tertullian,
268
XXV.— PHILEMON.
1. Syriac and Old Latin Versions, Muratorian Canon,
2. Tertullian, ......
In Marcion's Canon.
8. Origen, ...
4. Eusebius, ....
5. Jerome, ......
Defence against charge of being an unworthy Epistle.
269269
269270270
XXVI.— HEBREWS.
Note on the Epistle,
1. Barnabas, .
2. Clement of Rome, .
3. Ignatius, .
272272
272 274
CONTENTS.

27

4. Polycarp, ......
5. Hermas, . . ...
6. Justin Martyr, .....
7. Syriac and Old Latin Versions, Muratorian Canon,
8. Irenaeus, .
9. Pantaenus, .
10. Clement of Alexandria,
11. Tertullian,
12. Caius (about A.D. 200),
13. Hippolytus,
14. Origen,
15. Dionysius of Alexandria,
16. Cyprian,
17. Eusebius, .
18. Athanasius,
19. Cyril of Jerusalem,
20. Epiphanius,
21. Theodoret, .
22. Jerome,

275
.275 275
276 276 277
277
278 279279
280282 282
283284
284 284 285
286

XXVH.— THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES.
Note ou the Catholic Epistles,
1. Clement of Alexandria,
3. Origen,
4. Dionysius of Alexandria,
5. Eusebius, .
6. Epiphanius,
7. Jerome,

289 289290290
290 290
290

XXVIII.— JAMES.

Note on the Epistle,

.' . . .

292

1. Clement of Rome, .

292

2. Hermas,

298

3. Ignatius, .

295

4. Polycarp, .

295
5. Syriac and Old Latin Versions, Muratorian Canon,
295
6. Irenaeus,
.....
295
7. Clement of Alexandria,
296
8. Hippolytus,
296
9. Tertullian,
296
Not quotations.
10. Origen,
297
Quotes by name ; see
also notes.
11. Eusebius, .
298
12. Athanasius,
.
299
13. Cyril of Jerusalem,
, 299
14. Epiphanius,
299
15. Jerome,
.
299
28

CONTENTS.

XXIX. -FIRST PETER.

Note on the Epistle,

301

1. Barnabas, .

302

2. Clement of Rome, .

302

8. Hermas,

303
4. Ignatius, .
304
5. Polycarp, .
804
Clear use of 1 Peter.
6. Papias,
805
Use of 1 Peter.
7. Letter to Diognetus,
306
8. Letter of the Christians of Vienne and Lyons,
306
9. Syriac and Old Latin Versions,
and Muratorian Canon, .
306
10. Irenaeus,
807
11. Clement of Alexandria,
307
12. Tertullian,
807
See note.
13. Origen,
.308
14. Cyprian, .
309
15. Eusebius, .
310
16. Athanasius,
310
17. CyrU of Jerusalem,
811
18. Epiphanius,
811
19. Jerome,
811
XXX.-
-SECOND PETER.
Note on the Epistle,
812
1. Barnabas, .
313
2. Clement of Rome, .
313
See notes.
3. Hermas,
313
4. Ignatius, .
314
¦ See note, p. 313.
5. Polycarp, .
314
6. Justin Martyr,
314
7. Syriac and Old Latin Versions, and Muratorian Canon, .
314
8. Melito,
• . . • .
814
9. Irenffius,
315
10. Theophilus,
315
11. Clement of Alexandria,
816
See note.
12. Origen,
316
13. Firmilian, .
317
14. Eusebius, .
317
15. Athanasius,
317
16. Cyril of Jerusalem,
317
17. Gregory of Nazianzum,
818
18. Epiphanius,
818
19. Jerome,
318
CONTENTS.

29

XXXI.— FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN.

Note on the Epistle, ....

319

1. Barnabas, ....

319

2. Clement of Rome, ......

320

3. Hermas, ...

320

4. Ignatius, .

320

5. Polycarp, .....

320

Clear quotation.

6. Papias, ......

321

Used the Epistle.

7. Justin Martyr, ....

321

8. Letter to Diognetus, .....

321

9. Letter of the Christians gf Vienne and Lyons,

321

10. Muratorian Canon, .....

321

Names two (perhaps three) Epistles of John.

11. Syriac and Old Latin Versions, ....
322
Contain it.
12. Irenaeus, ......
322
Quotes.
13. Clement of Alexandria, ....
322
Quotes.
14. Tertullian, ......
323
Quotes.
15. Origen, .......
323
Quotes, see note.
16. Dionysius of Alexandria, .....
324
17. Cyprian, . . ....
324
18. Eusebius, .......
325
19. Athanasius, . ....
325
20. Cyril of Jerusalem, ....
325
21. Epiphanius, ......
826
22. Jerome, .......
326
XXXII.— SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES OF JOHN.
Note on the two Epistles, .....
827
1. Polycarp, ....
328
2. Ignatius, ....
328
3. Irenasus, ....
328
4. Clement of Alexandria,
328
5. Origen, ....
829
6. Dionysius of Alexandria, .
329
7. Cyprian, ....
329
8. Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria,
329
9. Eusebius, ....
329
10. Athanasius,
330
11. Laodicene Council, a.d. 364,
330
12. Cyril of Jerusalem,
330
13. Epiphanius,
330
14. Jerome, ....
330
30

CONTENTS.

XXXIII.— JUDE.

Note on the Epistle,
1. Barnabas, ....
2. Hermas,
8. Polycarp, ....
4. Muratorian Canon,
Contains it.
5. Syriac and Old Latin Versions,
Old Latin contains it, Syriac wants it.
6. Irenaeus, ....
Doubtful.
7. Clement of Alexandria,
Quoted and commented on Jude. .
8. Tertullian, On Book of Enoch and the ' ' Apostle Jude. ' '
9. Origen, Quotes, see note.
10. Eusebius, .
11. Athanasius,
12. Cyril of Jerusalem,
18. Epiphanius,
14. Jerome,

331 831331
331 382332882832883
333 335
335
335 335385

XXXIV. —APOCALYPSE.

(For general note see p. 357.)

1. Barnabas, ....

336

2. Clement of Rome, ...

336

3. Hermas, ......

336

See note.

4. Ignatius, . . . . .

888

5. Papias, ...

838

See note.

6. Justin Martyr, ......

339

Quotes as by the Apostle John.

7. Melito, .....
339
8. ApoUonius, ......
340
Quotes.
9. Letter of the Christians of Vienne and Lyons,
340
Quotes.
10. Irenaeus, .......
340
Quotes by name as by the Apostle John ; see note.
11. Athenagoras, .....
342
12. Theophilus, ......
342
13. Clement of Alexandria, .....
342
Cites as Scripture.
14. Tertullian, .......
34.^?
CONTENTS.

31

15. Caius, ••.....

343

Ascribed it to Cerinthus ; see note.

16. Muratorian Fragment, .......

344

Names it as John's.

17. Syriac (wants it) and Old Latin Versions (contain it).

344

18. Origen, ...

344

The Apostle John's.

19. Hippolytus, ........

845

Gospel and Apocalypse by the Apostle.

20. Dionysius of Alexandria, .......
345
Not by the Apostle ; see his arguments indicated in successive para
graphs.
21. Cyprian, .........
350
22. Methodius, .....
351
23. Victorinus Petavionensis, .......
351
24. Pamphilus, ........
352
25. Lactantius, . . .....
352
26. Eusebius, .....
352
The rauk of the book doubtful; see p. 11 and note.
27. Athanasius, ........
353
28. Cyril 
353
Omits the book.
29. Epiphanius, ..... . .
353
By John.
30. Hilary,  . .
355
31. Jerome, .......
355
Note on Chapter XXXIV 
357
PAET II.
TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.
1. Tacitus (a.d. 61 to about a.d. 120),
2. Martial (a.d. 60 to A.D. 100),
3. Pliny's letter asking directions from Trajan,
4. The Emperor's reply to Pliny,
5. Suetonius (a.d. 121),
6. Letter of Hadrian to Minucius Fuadanus
7. Letter of Hadrian to Servianus, .
8. Antoninus Pius (Marcus Aurelius ?) ¦irphs ri
9. Lucian (a.d. 176), .
10. Celsus (about a.d. 178), .
See note ; on the Gospels ; references to Matthew ; to Mark and Luke
to John ; to apocryphal narratives ; to the Epistles.
11. Porphyry (end of third century), .....
12. Chrysostom on Celsus and Porphyry,
(about A.D. 130),
h Koivhv Trjs 'Airios (A.D,
148 ?),
361
362
362364
364364
366367
368369
378
379
32 CONTENTS.
PAET III.
TESTIMONIES OF. HEEETICS.
1. Simon Magus (contemporary of Paul), ..... 383
Note on ; Irenaeus ; Hippolytus on Simon.
2. Cerinthus (contemporary of John), ..... 384
Note on ; Epiphanius on.
3. Naassenes or Ophites (first century), ..... 385
Note on ; Hippolytus on ; subdivisions of Ophites, Peratae, Sethiani,
Justin.
4. Basilides and Isidorus (a.d. 125), ... . . 389
See Introduction ; testimonies from, and criticisms on.
5. Marcion (about a.d. 140; see p. 75, note), .... 393
1. Note on Marcion ; Justin on, p. 398 ; 2. Testimony of the Fathers
to the character and object of Marcion's work, 394 ; 3. Contents
of Marcion's Gospel (in comparison with Luke's Gospel), 400 ;
4. Marcion and the Epistles, 408 ; 5. Marcion's Apostolicon, 409.
6. Carpocrates (contemporary of Basilides), . . . . .411
Note on ; testimonies by.
7. Valentinus (a.d. 140), ....... 413
Note on ; testimonies by ; examples of Valentinian quotation or inter
pretation, with notes.
8. Heracleon (a.d. 140-160), ....... 419
Note on ; testimonies to ; and note on " Colarbasus ; " specimens of
writings of Heracleon.
' 9. Ptolemaeus (contemporary of Heracleon), ... . 422
Note on ; his position, and quotations of Scripture.
10. Marcus, ......... 424
Note on Marcus and Marcosians ; quotations of Scripture ; Prepoii
(a Maroionite).
11. Docetse, ......... 425
Note on Docetae (and on Mouoimus) ; Hippolytus's report of Docetic
quotations.
12. Theodotus, ........ 426
Note on Theodotus; several of the name; use of the Gospels (John's
included) and the Epistles ; Theodotus as quoted by Epiphanius.
13. Apelles (contemporary of Marcion), ..... 429
Note on Apelles ; his quotations of Scripture.
14. Julius Cassianus, ... ... 431
15. The Ebionites, ........ 431
Note on the Ebionites ; their treatment of Scripture.
16. The Montanists or Cataphrygians, ..... 434
Note on the Montanists ; their tenets.
17. The Alogi, . . . ... . . . .436
Note on the Alogi ; possible allusions in Irenseus and Eusebius ; testi
mony of Epiphanius.

CONTENTS.
18. Clementine Homilies, ......
Quotations in the Homilies from the Gospels and from unknown sources
(most of the passages under descriptive headings); note on use made
of other books of the N. T. in the Homilies.
19. Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, .....
Note on ; quotations from.
[Table ofthe Lists of the Heretics given by Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Epipha-
nius, Philastrius, Pseudo-TertuUian, arid Theodoret],

33 438445 447

PAET IV.
EXTRA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.
1. Gospel of the Hebrews,
A. Testimonies to its existence,
1. Ignatius,
2. Hegesippus,
3. Papias, .
4. Irenaeus,
5. Clement of Alexandria,
6. Origen, .
7. Eusebius,
8. Jerome, .
9. Theodoret (a.d. 451-458),
10. Nicephorus (a.d. 758-828),
11. Epiphanius,
B. Quotations from its Nazarene or its Ebionite form — Epiphanius,
Jerome, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Origen, &c., .
2. Peotevangelium Jacobi, .....
3. Acts of Pilate, . . ....
4. Gospel of Peter, and note, .....
5. Gospel of Egyptians, ......
Passages of Unknown Origin oooueeing in Early Weiters,

451451451
451 452 452
452 452 453453455 455
456 456464 464466468 470

INTEODUCTION.

I.— BAENABAS.
Though we have no very early — certainly no contemporary — reference
to this Epistle, the first references with which we meet are both ex
plicit and harmonious.^ Clement of Alexandria, who is said to have
written a short commentary upon it, and who certainly quotes it re
peatedly, calls it the work of the Apostle Barnabas. Origen calls it the
Cathohc Epistle of Barnabas. The " Apostolical Constitutions " (date
uncertain) quote, or rather appropriate, chapters 18-20 of this Epistle.
It appears, therefore, that at the end of the second and beginning of the
third century the Alexandrian Church regarded this letter as genuine
and important. Neither Clement nor Origen can be fairly charged
with assigning to it a place among the canonical Scriptures. But when
we find it in the Cod. Sin. after the books of the New Testament, we
see grounds for ascribing to it liturgical if not canonical authority
in the estimation of the Alexandrian Church of the fourth century.
Eusebius (H. E. III. 26) numbers it among the spurious (iv roh voOols).
It is doubtful whether he meant by this that the Epistle was not the
' Hilgenfeld (Nov. Test. ex. Can. Rec, Fasc. iv. p. 94) finds Barnabas, c. 18,
21, in the fragmentary Duce vice vel Judicium Petri. The same passage is also said
to be silently appropriated in Apost. Const., Book vii. 1-18. But the whole basis
is uncertain, and the dates are hypothetical. This ethical portion of Barnabas, c. 18,
20, which is in some measure a paraphrase of the Sermon on the Mount, corre
sponds to another paraphrase which is found amongst other matter in the Apost.
Const. , and parts of it are also found in the short homilies ascribed to various Apos
tles (John, Matthew, Peter, Andrew, Philip, Simon, Jaraes, Nathanael, Thomas,
Cephas, and Bartholomew) in ai 810x070! at Sii; KAyj/uei/Tos ko! Kav6ves iKKK-QcriaaTMol
rav ayiav 6,iroiTT6\av (see Hilg. N. T., Fasc. iv. p. 95' et seq.), which Hilg. regards as
the Ihice vice vel Judicium Petri. But while iu Barnabas, c. 18, in Apost. Const.,
c. 1, and in those Siarayal (which are a shorter and probably earlier form of the
Apostolical Constitutions), we have a formal beginning, " There are two ways," &c.,
we have not such a correspondence in detail as to be of much use in deciding
questions of date or authorship ; and to appeal to that Dues vice, &c. , in order to de
cide on the date of Barnabas, is like going from twilight to darkness for a clearer
view.

II INTEODUCTION.
work of Barnabas, or merely that it was not canonical. Jerome, how
ever, unhesitatingly calls it apocryphal, though he does not say that
it is not genuine. In the Western Church we have no proof (save the
existence of an old Latin version of the first seventeen chapters^) that
the Epistle had at any time a place in the regard of Christian com
munities. It does not seem to have been known in the west 'before
the fourth century : it was forgotten even in the east after the seventh
or eighth.
The Cod. Sin. is the only complete Greek text which has been pub
lished in full; but Hilgenfeld (1877) made known the readings in
another text discovered by Bryennios. The readings in the Cod. Sin.
are often corrupt, and in some cases appeal is made by editors to the
old Latin version for guidance. (See reference to Bryennios below,
p. viii.)
If we ask whether this Epistle is really the work of Paul's comrade,
all the early positive testimony whioh we have makes us answer that
it is ; but there is no little weight in the negative testimony, which
shows us that its reputation was always local, and even in the locality
short-lived. The witnesses (Clem. Alex., Origen, and Jerome) were
not contemporaries of BarnalDas ; and their evidence goes no further
than to assure us of the repute in which the production was held in
their day. Even in regard to Clement's frequent use of it, we must
add that while he quotes, he holds himself at liberty to criticise and
blame it. There seems to have been in his mind, and still more pro
bably in the minds of those who came after him, an instinctive convic
tion that even though Barnabas might be the author, the Epistle was
not a rule for Christians. And this instinct continued to gain strength
until Alexandrian Christians forgot what the rest of Christendom con
tinued to disregard.
Nor is the reason far to seek. The arguments in the Epistle are
such as would find their chief popularity in Alexandria ; but even
there they could only be popular for a short time. They go to prove
the superiority of Christianity to Judaism ; of inner or mystical know
ledge (yvSo-is) to the mere acceptance of the letter of the Old Testa
ment ; and what Paul in Galatians had done for aU men, his friend was
supposed in Alexandria to have done by this epistle in a way specially
acceptable to mystics. The coincidence of the author's purpose with
that of good men in Alexandria prevented their testing his assertions,
or carefully estimating the probability of his being " Barnabas." But
the temporary acceptance soon came to an end ; and this, in all pro
bability, because the early Church felt what modern, critics have
almost unanimously agreed in stating. The Barnabas of the New
Testament was a Jew, a Levite, more Jewish in his leanings than
1 This Latin version has for title "Epistola Barnabae :" see Gebhardt, Prole".
p. xxix.

BAENABAS. Ul
Paul (Gal. ii. 13) ; but the author of this Epistle denounces Jew
ish sacrifices (c. 2) and Jewish fasts (c. 3) in a way foreign to Paul ;
he declares (c. 4) that Jews lost their covenant rights when Moses
broke the tables of the law, &c. He attempts to describe the cere
monies of the great day of atonement (c. 7), and to treat the red heifer
as a type of Christ (c. 8), but is so incorrect in his statements as to
show that he " was neither accurately acquainted with the text of the
law, nor had even seen the celebration of the day of atonement." ^ His
position in regard to Judaism is therefore not that of Barnabas. And
another argument against his being the companion of Paul and of the
other Apostles may well be found in the famous passage where, desir
ous of proving Christ's power as a Saviour, he says, " When He chose
His own apostles who were to preach His Gospel, He chose those who
were lawless beyond the bounds of all ordinary sin, that He might
show He came not to call the righteous, but sinners " (vttc/j Traa-av
a[ji,apTiav avofjiuiTipov';, tva 8et^ on ovk -^Xdev KaXia-ai Sixat'ovs aXXct afiaprm-
X.0VS — c. 5). We can scarcely imagine that this was spoken of the other
Apostles by one who had known their goodness and truth, and who, if
he wrote the Epistle at all, wrote it after the destruction of Jerusalem,
when of them all only John survived.
It seems impossible in the face of such internal evidence to accept
the statements of Clem. Alex, and Origen ; or if they are accepted as
to the author's name, we are bound to suppose that this Barnabas was not
the companion of St Paul. But for critical purposes, it is perhaps more
important to come to some conclusion as to the date than as to the
authorship. If it were written by the Barnabas of whom we read iu
our New Testament, it must be a production of the first century.
From the silence of the New Testament as to any proceedings of Bar
nabas in the last period of St Paul's life, we should not suppose that he
was alive at the siege of Jerusalem. This Epistle, however, is evident
ly written after the fall of the temple — i. e., after a.d. 70.^
But this is aU that is evident. Some critics have tried to show
that at the time when the Epistle was written, hopes were enter-
1 Donaldson, Apostolical Fathers (1874), p. 256. See the whole argument sum-
med up by Dr Donaldson.
2 We may here quote from c. 16 the passage on which the question of date chief
ly turns. The last sentence is ambiguous, but the whole may be rendered as fol
lows : " Yet again I shall speak to you about the temple, how those ill-fated and
misguided creatures set their hopes upon the building, and not upon their God and
Creator, as though the mere building were the house of God." Then he quotes
Isaiah xl. 12, Ixvi. 1, xlix. 17, to show how vain was the Jewish hope ; and goes on
to quote, "Again says the Lord, Behold, they who destroy this temple shall them
selves build it. This is fulfilled, for because of their making war it was destroyed
by the enemies. And now also they, and the servants of the enemies, shall
build it anew from the foundation." After a little he says, "Let us ask whether
there is a templo of God;" and he answers "there is"— but he goes on to show
that it is "a spiritual temple built by the Lord."

IV INTEODUCTION.
tained that the temple was about to be rebuilt by Jews in co-oper
ation with Gentiles. It is quite true that he goes on to speak of
a spiritual temple ; but he is meanwhile speaking of a temple which
enemies could destroy, and Jews along with enemies could rebuild, and
this must be a material temple. The conclusion therefore is, that we
have a date early in Hadrian's reign, before Hadrian turned against the
Jews. There is evidence that the Jews did expect him to favour them
about this time. Within the short period when this expectation was
cherished, our " Barnabas " is supposed to have written, — i e., about a.d.
120. It must be admitted that some straining is needed to make us
fix on that particular time. All that can be fairly concluded from the
passage is, that the author seems to have had some idea of a possible
reconstruction of the temple, when the Jews, along with servants of
Eome (or, according to another reading, themselves acting as servants
of Eome), would rebuild it.^
There is another passage (c. 4) in which the author seems to give an
indication of his date by quoting Daniel vii. 4 and vii. 7, but here too
certainty fails us. That there are ten kings past, and that a little
king would rise to crush three, may be accepted as the meaning ; but
who were the ten, and who was the eleventh ? Who was the first, and
who were the rpeis v<j>' h ] Vespasian, Nerva, and Domitian have been
suggested as the eleventh ; and the arguments for Domitian would be
clear if we oould see how to say of Domitian in relation to his prede
cessors ETaTretVoxrei/ rpets ixf}' ev. ^ As things are, we must pass the apoc
alyptic riddle by, — perhaps with a suspicion that "Barnabas" himself
had no very clear notion how to read it.
There is a reference in Origen (C. Cels., I. 63), who quotes from
Celsus some misrepresentation of the character of the Apostles, and
adds that Celsus probably picked up the idea from the passage in
Barnabas (inrep Traxrav d/AaprtW avo/xuiTepoi). This shows Origen's be
lief that " Barnabas " was accessible to Celsus, and indicates for Bar
nabas a date not later than the middle of the second century. But
the date of Celsus himself is not very certain, and we get from this
nothing more than a limit.
On the whole, therefore, we cannot be sure of the date. There is in
the whole tone of the Epistle, however, something that makes us feel
it necessary to regard Jerusalem as in ruins ;^ and ^Elia Capitolina,
^ I caimot see that Hilgenfeld, N. T., p. 75 et seq., has succeeded in disposing of
all reference to the material temple ; or that Dr Donaldson's arguments, p. 267 et seq.
bring him to his conclusion, p. 273, for a date within the first quarter of the
second century.
2 The Sibylline Oracles, B. v., say, "Tpeii &p^ova-iv, d Se rptrosoif/f Kparlja-et irctn-oji/. "
This comes after a description of the Romau emperors down to Hadrian, so that the
three are probably Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius, and Commodus. A similar passage
occurs in B. viii., where it is said that three reigns come between Hadrian and the
end of the world. See Lardner, vol. ii. p. 337.
^ See Hefele, Proleg. , p. xiii.

BARNABAS. V
A.D. 119, as not yet founded. And when we add this to the passage
(o. 4) describing an apparent expectation in the writer's own mind that
the old temple would be built up again, we may probably conclude
with the majority of recent writers that a.d. 119 or a.d. 120 is after all
a likely time for it being written. But there is not really any very
cogent reason against going back to an earlier time soon after the
fall of Jerusalem, and so finding ourselves almost in the very age
of the Apostles.^ That the apostolic Barnabas wrote it, is however an
untenable theory.
We next ask to whom the Epistle was addressed. It would take
us too long to recount all the opinions on this subject, and the argu
ments by which they have been supported. We may say in a word,
that the author seems to have regarded his readers as an ordinary
Christian community, — his arguments being such as all needed, and all
might appreciate. He appears to have had a special church in view.
'The majority were probably Gentiles by birth, but there is nothing to
prevent one believing that there was a Jewish element among them.^
That the writer himself was accustomed to use Greek we may
safely conjecture from c. 9, and from the same passage we may sup
pose that he was under Alexandrian influence. When he argues that
Abraham circumcised 318 persons of his household, and that in doing
so he was looking forward to Jesus " embodying the lessons taught by
three letters " (TIH Xa^wv rpi&v ypafi.fjia.TO}v So-yfiaTo), he not only speaks
as a Greek, but makes Abraham's thoughts run in the same mould !
" What, then, was the wisdom (yvoJo-is) given in this ? . . . The
eighteen are IH — there you have Jesus ('Iijo-oCs). And because the
cross was to express the grace (of our redemption) by the letter T,
he says also 300. Thus he shows Jesus in the two letters (IH), and
the cross in the one letter T." " No one," he complacently adds,
" ever learned a more capital bit of knowledge from me than this ;
but I know that ye are worthy." From this passage we may conclude
that the writer was a Greek writing to Greeks, and probably a Greek
trained in the logomachy of Alexandria. It does not seem from the
Epistle as a whole that he was acquainted with any of the systems of
Christian Gnosticism ; but he represents significantly the tendencies to
overvalue yi/wcris, and to regard the allegorising of Old Testament his
tory as an important branch of yvScris, which afterwards issued in these
systems. In answer to the question whether Barnabas quotes our
canonical Gospels, we may refer to the passages in our text. We have
1 Thus Lardner says A.D. 71 or 72. The passage, c. 4, 14 (see our text, under
the head of Barnabas), seems to point to a time (not, indeed, when signs and wonders
were seen, but) when Israel was utterly abandoned ; and one thinks of the abandon
ment as recent. " Between the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the reduc
tion of the remaining cities of Judea, of which Josephus has given an account after
the burning of the temple." — Lardner.
^ Even c. 14, 5, and c. 16, 7, may be interpreted as confirming this.

VI INTRODUCTION.
as good evidence as can be reasonably required for his use of our St
Matthew in c. 4, 14 — c. 5, 9 ; and the other passages, while probably
confirmatory of this usage, are not to be regarded as evidence of it.
The attempts to find references to Luke are not very successful. From
John there is not any absolute quotation, although there are several
interesting passages, in which ihe paraUeUsm of thought is suggest
ive.^ The coiTespondence in thought and theology between this
Epistle and the fourth Gospel — still more perhaps between Bamabas
and the first Epistle of John — is too striking to be left unnoticed.
" The ' Son of God ' must manifest Himself in the flesh, and come
through death and the cross to His kingly power, must bring life and
divine abiding — that is in both compositions the. ruling thought. He
existed before the foundation of the world, was the sender of the pro
phets, the subject of prophecy, seen before by Abraham, and prefigured
in the person of Moses as Israel's only hope." So said Keim,^ in words
which are not to be forgotten, though he himself may seem at a later
time to draw back somewhat from the conclusion to which they lead.*
Not only does Barnabas regard Christ's incarnation in the same way as
John does, but the facts of Christ's life as recorded by John seem to
be the indispensable basis of the theology of Barnabas. It is not pos
sible to avoid this conclusion, by speaking of both as products of the
Alexandrian school, because the most Alexandrian portion of John —
the doctrine of the Logos — is conspicuous by its absence in Barnabas.
This leads us to observe further, that the Epistle of Barnabas is so
much more theological than Clement, as to have much the same re
semblance to it which John has to the Synoptists. It is quite true
that he is not a clear theologian ; that his use of Old Testament types
is hard and over-refined, and that his general disquisitions are cum
brous ; and that, as we have seen, his knowledge of Old Testament
history and ritual is extremely inaccurate : but all this must not cause
us to forget how pure is his theology, — how unfaltering is his faith in
the one Almighty Maker and Euler of all, — and how his constant endea
vour is to show that the Son of God was incarnate, and taught, and
suffered, and died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both
ofthe dead and living. And when he comes* to teach the practical
duties of the Christian life, he shows a tenderness of feeling and a
beauty of expression that make us almost ready to think that he was
none other thati the " good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of
faith," of whom we read in Acts xi, 24.
1 See under head of ' ' John " the references to Barnabas.
2 Jesu V. Nazar. (1867), vol. i. pp. 141-143. Compare Keim's Gesch. Jesu (1873)
p. 41, where he makes the date of Johu a.d. 130. '
' See Geb. and Har. , p. xl.
* Although the second part (chaps. 18-21) is not in the old Latin version the MS
authority and the internal resemblances seem to combine iu justifying the conclu
sion that it is an integral part ofthe Epistle.

JJARNABAS. Vll
In conclusion, we may note that in the theology of this Epistle we
find no proof of a chasm between the Petrine and Pauline parties in
the Church. In the author's views of "life," of "life-giving," of
Christ's "blood," of the "forgiveness of sin," we have unstudied
agreement now with one, now with the other of the great Apostles.
In his view of the Old Testament he is too individual and absurd to
resemble any one of the canonical writers ; but if some controversialist
conclude from this that he is merely "ultra Pauline," he has to account
for the other passages where we seem to have an echo of the teach
ings of John or James.^
[The relation of Barnabas to the Fourth Gospel is to be studied as a
matter of thought and of theology, rather than of verbal quotation or
parallelism. (See Introduction, " Barnabas.") But the following pas
sages are at least suggestive : —
C. 5, 6. avrhs Se, Iva Karapy^ff-ri rhv Bdvarov ko! t^v e/c veKpSJv avdo-raaiv Sei^-rj, '6tl
iv (Top/c! eSei avrhv tpavepiiidiivai, vTre/jLeLvev.
f^v ds rhv alwva (c. 6, 3 ; c. 8, 5 ; c. 11, 10, 11). Compare John
vi. 51, 58, &c.
6, 6. iirl rhv t/jiaTiiriiSv — John xix. 24, same quotation. See also Justin, Ap. I.
38.
6, 7. iv (rapKl odv avrov jxiXKovros <j>avepov(r9ai Kal irdo-x^iv, irpoe^avepciid-n
rh TviBos. Compare John i. 31 ; 1 John i. 2 ; iii. 5, 8 ; also 1 Tim.
iii. 16.
5 6 ¦ 6 7. . . . ^av€pa>0TJvai iv irapK'i . . . ^avfpovffBai, &c. See John xix.
34."
7, 2. ei oiv 6 6ihs rov &edv, &v Kipios Kal /xeWav Kplveiv (avras Kal veKpois,
etraOev 'iva 7] TrXTjy^ avrov ^woirol^a-p Vfias, TTKTTeua-ufj.ev Srt 6 vihs rov
®eov oiiK ifivvaro TraBeiv el fii] Si' ri/xas. Compare John v. 21, flf. See
foioxoiiiffci, C. 12, 5.
7, 9. KaraKevT-Zjcravres. Compare John xix. 37.
11, 17. Qwo-iroioiixtvoi ^-qaoixev, &c.
19 12. ou irpoffijjei! iirl irpotrfvxhi' i" "-vveiS-iia-fL iro!'))p^ = John ix. SI, a/iapruiKaiv
6 ©ehs OVK ctKovet.
21 2. ^X^^ ^^^' ^"tV-aiv eh ois ipytia-n(T0e=Soh.n xii. 8, ruhs irraxohs vivrore
exere p.eff lauToii/.
21, 6. eeoS(SoKToi=SiSoKTo! {rov) 0eoS— John vi. 45.]

1 In regard to quotations from Old Testament Apocryphal Books, we may say that
the only one beyond doubt is from Sirach iv. 31 (see Barnabas, c. 19, 9). The other
passages (Enoch in c. iv. 3, and c. xvi. 5 ; Esdras, c. xii. 1 ; and Sirach in c. iv. 26)
are, for various reasons, not to be relied upon as quotations. See Donaldson, p.
304 et seq.
2 On the other hand, it has been said that the words of Barnabas, c. 5, 13 ("eSei
yi,p Iva iirl JiJAou irdB-rj- \eyei yhp S Trpo(prireiav iir' air if- ^eliral /lov Trjs ^l/vxvs dirh
Ao/tupaias"), could not have been written had the author known what John says of
the Roman soldier's spear- John xix. 34. But this by no means follows.

vm INTRODUCTION.

IL— CLEMENT OP EOME.
First Epistle.
Clement's place in the traditions of the early Church is a very prom
inent one. After the chief apostles, there is no man to whom the
Christians of the second and third centuries more frequently looked
back. Numerous works falsely ascribed to him were partly the
effect and partly the cause of his celebrity. Several Epistles-'- bear
his name ; certain " Homilies " and " Eecognitions " also ; a Liturgy ;
and the Apostolical Canons and Constitutions. There is now little
doubt that the only one of those works whioh can be fairly reckoned
as his is the epistle from " the Church at Eome to the Church at
Corinth," commonly known as the First Epistle of Clement. We must
accept it as written by him in name of the Church, although no
trace of his personal authorship appears in its contents. It is through
out a letter from church to church. Its testimony to the canonical
Scriptures is specially important, because it is undoubtedly of very
early date.
Until lately, only one MS of this interesting letter was known to
exist, and it is incomplete. It forms part of the Codex Alexandrinus
(Cod. A) in the British Museum. There was a gap in its contents ;
but in 1875 critics and students were startled by the appearance of a
careful and complete edition published in Constantinople from a MS
discovered in the " library of the Holy Sepulchre '' in that city. Its
editor is Philotheos Bryennios, Metropolitan of Serrse. Six new chap
ters ^ (containing among other interesting matter a prayer of singular
beauty ^) are added by this new MS to the text of Cod. A. In the same
book published by Bryennios is contained also a complete edition of the
so-called " Second Epistle of Clement," which is manifestly not an
Epistle, but a Homily. The learned and fortunate editor promised
to issue in due time the other works found in the same MS volume
1 As we shall see afterwards, there are epistles in Greek, in Syriac, and in Latin
ascribed to Clement.
2 Chaps. 58 to 63.
3 The prayer— the oldest public prayer ofthe Christian Church— is partially incor
porated in the " Apostolical Constitutions." Dr Donaldson (Theol. Rev., No. lvi.)
has pointed out that the prayer claims (c. 59, c. 63, see also c. 56) inspiration and au
thority, and this in some degree accounts for the reverence paid to the epistle in the
early'Church. The liturgies of the early Church resemble this prayer in many of their
phrases. See Lightfoot's Clement, and also 'Princeton Review,' April 1877, p. 340.

CLEMENT OF HOME. ix
including ' The Doctrine of the Apostles,' ' Barnabas,' ^ and the ' Ig-
natian Letters.'
Scarcely was this discovery realised when a Syriac MS of the " Two
Epistles " was also found (1876) in Paris. We are now therefore in
possession of three MSS, with apparently quite independent testi
monies, whereby the text of this early Christian work — ' Clement's
First Epistle ' — can be fairly decided upon.
That it is indeed a very early work there can be no reasonable doubt.
Traditional testimony consistently establishes the existence and prom
inence of a letter of " Clement to the Corinthians," and furnishes us
also with a key to its characteristics, as written by him in name of his
Church. " The Epistle which you wrote to us by Clement " is the
description of it by Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, writing to the Eomans
about A.D. 170. (Eus. H. E. IV. 23.) ^ It was habitually read in
the Church of Corinth in the end of the second century ; it was evi
dently used by the author of the Epistle of Polycarp ; ^ and both
Eusebius and Jerome tell us that it was still publicly read in some
churches in their times. Its position at the end of Cod. A as an
appendix to the New Testament, and the even higher honour paid
to it by the newly-found Syriac MS, which inserts it in the middle of
the New Testament after the Catholic Epistles, can be no ground of
surprise. We must conclude that what we have in our hands is the
Epistle so highly valued in the early Church.*
But still there remain two questions : •(!) As to the existence of a
Clement with such a position as the general acceptance of his Epistle
seems to imply ; and (2) as to the reasons for ascribing to Clement the
authorship of this particular Epistle.
(1) That there was a Clement of note in the early Church we must
accept as a fact, notwithstanding the fabulous additions which have
been made to it. Iren»us (B. III. 33) tells us that Peter and Paul
gave the office of oversight to Linus (mentioned in 2 Tim. iv. 21) ;
that he was succeeded by Anencletus ; and that Clement, who had
seen the Apostles, and had conversed with them, and had been taught
by them, was third in succession. Even if we doubt some points of
this narrative, there are no good grounds for doubting the shorter state
ment which we owe to Eusebius, that Clement succeeded Anencletus,
^ On Barnabas he sent his readings to Hilgenfeld, who published an edition mak
ing use of them in 1877. See before, p. ii.
^ Cod. A has it as " Clement's First Epistle," both in the subscription at the end of
the epistle itself and in the Index of Books at the end of the New Testament. The
Cod. foundby Bryennios has it also as " Clement's First Epistle ; " so too the Syriac.
^ See Hefele ; Geb. and Har., Proleg., p. Ivii.
* In the newly-found chapters is a notable reference to the Holy Trinity : " For
as God liveth, and the Lord Jesus Christ liveth, and the Holy Spirit liveth— the faith
and hope of the Elect— so assuredly," &c. Until the edition of Bryennios appeared,
this was only known in a, quotation by Basil, and was the occasion of much per
plexity.

X INTEODUCTION.
whose bishopric of twelve years had begun at the same time as the
reign of Domitian.^ Elsewhere Eusebius says he died in the third
year of Trajan's reign. This gives us 93 a.d. to 101 a.d. as the term
of Clement's episcopate. Tertullian^ also directly connects Clement
with Peter, saying, in his fervid way, that he was ordained by Peter ;¦ —
saying it so as to lead some to suppose that Clement was the first
overseer of the Eoman Church after the Apostles. This was a wide
spread tradition in the Western Church at a later time ; but it probably
took its shape from the fact that his is the first prominent name in the
post-apostolic ministry,
(2) What, then, are our grounds for connecting this disciple of the
Apostles, and overseer of the Eoman Church (whether he were the first
or not), with the Epistle under consideration ? ^
" Hermas " (about a.d. 140) says Clement's function was to send works
to foreign Churches. There is some doubt as to whether this was the
Eoman Clement ; but Dionysius (a.d. 170) says Clement's Epistle was
read in the Church of Corinth every Lord's Day. Hegesippus, who was
at Corinth on his way to Eome about the year a.d. 140 * (Pius being
Bishop), seems to have read the Epistle at Corinth, and there is no
good ground to doubt (although this is not explicitly said by Eusebius)
that he speaks of it as Clement's. He also says explicitly that the
commotions in the Corinthian Church occurred in Clement's time ; and,
as Irenceus ^ is equally explicit on this point, we have the strongest
ground for connecting him with the Epistle, the subject of which is so
clearly those commotions. The words of Irenasus are : " en-\ tovtov
TOV KX-^/AevTos." Clement of Alexandria ^ quotes it repeatedly, calling it
at one time Clement's, at another the Epistle of the Eomans to the
Corinthians. There is doubt as to Origen's use ofthe Epistle, but none
as to his regard for Clement. Eusebius sums up the evidence very
fairly by saying that " Clement was universally recognised as the
author of the first Epistle written by him to the Corinthians, bearing
to be by the Eoman Church." '^
Age ofthe Epistle.
As the date of Clement's " Episcopate " (we may use this word with
out attempting to fix its exact meaning) is a matter of -controversy, we
cannot decide the date of the Epistle off-hand, by reference to the time
already fixed for his presidency of the Church of Eome. But from the
Epistle itself we learn that its despatch had been delayed by reason of
certain sudden and successive calamities which fell upon the -writers (c.
1). It appears that this was not the persecution in which the Apostles
' H. E. III. 84. ^ De Praescr. Haeret., p. xxxii.
' See Geb. and Har., p. Ix. * See Geb. and Har., p. Ix.
5 B. III. 3 ; see Eus. H. E. V. 6. » Strom. I. 7, p. 338 ; IV. 17, 105, p. 610, &c.
7 Eus. H. E. UL 39. '

CLEMENT OF EOME. ¦ xi
Peter and Paul met their end, for that end is elsewhere spoken of as
a matter of somewhat remote history (c. 5). It is not possible, there
fore, to suppose that the Epistle dates from the time of Nero ; and yet
it appears as if the generation of the writers had witnessed the depar
ture of the Apostles. Their words are : " But passing by aU ancient
examples, let us come to the combatants nearest our own time. Let
us take the illustrious examples of our own generation" (c. 5, 1).
And then comes an account of Peter and Paul. We may suppose,
therefore, that it was written within some twenty or thirty years of
the Apostles' time. This reference is confirmed by another passage,
which tells us that some of those bishops who had been appointed by
the Apostles, or other notable men, with the consent of the Churoh,
were dead, while others were stiU alive. In the newly discovered o.
63, it is said that the messengers are "men who have lived blamelessly
among us from youth to old age " (c. 44, 2, 3).
In addition to those indications whioh its express statements give,
we must note one or two furnished by its silence. It is silent as to
Gnostic errors,-"- and must, therefore, have been written before the
beginning of the second century, ^a date at which we know that Gnostic
teachers came to Eome. It is silent as to any persecutions of more
than a local character, and therefore must have been written before
the widespread suffering of Trajan's time (a.d. 115). It is silent as to
the controversy regarding the relations of bishop and presbyter. From
these indications,^ positive and negative, we may conclude that its
date cannot be earlier than 80, nor later than 100, of our era.
Now Hegesippus tells us that it was written in the time of Dom
itian. If we refer to his reign the calamities spoken of, we get for our
date a.d. 93, or a year not long after.^ It is by no means improbable
that Clement, Bishop of Eome and writer of this Epistle, is the same
as Clement nephew of Vespasian, and consul of the city, who was
slain in the year 96 a.d. This is at least a much more likely iden
tification than that which makes the Clement of the Epistle the per
son praised by Paul in Phil. iv. 3. But, be it as it may, the date
and authorship may be regarded as settled in favour of the Eoman
Clement, and the last decade of the century. The earlier date about
69 A.D. does not appear to be at aU well supported, even on the show
ing of its advocates ; and it does not seem possible for them to meet
the objections already adduced.
' The word yvSiai.% is repeatedly used without the technical meaning so common in
the second century. Compare c. 36, 2 ; c. 40, 1 ; c. 41, 4 ; c. 48, 5. The la,st of
these passages is not very clear, but the others may rule its rendering : see 1 Cor.
xii. 8 for similar use of the word.
2 It is impossible to found upon the phrases "in the beginning of the Gospel,"
"the ancient church of the Corinthians" (c. 47) as evidences for a late date, the
terms being obviously relative (see Phil. iv. 15).
' See Gebhardt and Harnack, Proleg. , § 7.

INTEODUCTION.

Evidence as to the Canon ofthe New Testament.
There can be no doubt that in respect of Scripture incidents, so far as
he refers to them, and in respect of Christian doctrine and morality,
Clement is entirely in accord with the New Testament. Nor can there
be any doubt of his knowing the writings of St Paul. " Take up,"
he says, " the Epistle of the blessed Paul, the Apostle. What first of
all did he write to you in the beginning of the Gospel ? Of a truth he
spiritually enjoined you concerning himself, and Cephas and Apollos,
because that then also ye had formed partialities," &c. (c. 47). Very
many passages may be adduced, in which his words seem echoes of
expressions in the other New Testament Epistles, as 1 Peter, Timothy,
and Titus. The resemblance to the Epistle to the Hebrews is so
marked as to have led to the theory that Clement -wrote it as well
as this Epistle. To these general statements we may add that in
appealing to words of Jesus he uses expressions closely corresponding
with those in our Gospels.
But these general remarks bring us to the very centre of the battle
field. Does Clement quote our canonical Gospels ? or do his words
seem to come from some different though kindred source ? Admitting, as
it is only fair to do, that his words give by no means continuous ver
bal coincidence with the passages in the Gospels which they resemble,
we have to inquire whether the divergence is inconsistent with the
theory of quotation. And this again compels us to take up a prior
question — viz., how did men quote in those days, and, more especially,
how did Clement himself quote ? Without entering fuUy on the sub
ject of the mode of quotations, we may simply say that when men had
to consult rolls, and not books, they were not likely to refer to their
authority in every instance. As might be expected, therefore, we
find that quotations are most accurate when they are long — the
writers in such cases thinking it worth while to take down and copy
what they wished to quote. But even in such cases we do not find,
and we have no right to expect, such severely accurate quotations as
are required in modem controversy. The resemblance which is re
quired before we can establish a quotation is therefore a matter of
degree ; and opinions held by modern critics as to the exact degree
on which we have a right to insist, vary with their preconceptions.
It seems to me, however, that in the case of Clement we have no need
to fall back upon general considerations. He quotes the Old Testa
ment largely ; and, as we have the Septuagint in our hands, we can
see how he uses it. At a very early stage in the Epistle, he quotes
Deut. xxxii. 15, when he says, " iTreTe\icr6r] to yeypaju/Ae'vov," and yet,
after this solemn appeal, we find that he has taken very considerable
liberties with his original. In other cases he throws a number of
passages together, and often so changes them all as to lead to a doubt

CLEMENT OF EOME. Xlll
from how many he drew the materials so fused. Out of fifty-seven quo
tations from the Old Testament, only seventeen are exact ; and some
of the others are so widely variant as to make it doubtful whether
even a treacherous memory could be the cause of the divergence.^
The following will show how Clement deals with the original in
slightly divergent quotation, and will also illustrate his citations of a
less accurate character : —
Clement, C. 52, 2. — ^ija-lv yap 6 iKXcKTO? Aaut'S- 'E^o/xoXo-y^cro/tiat tm
K-upto) Kat ap£0-£t avT<S v-Trep p.6<r)(pv viov Kipara iK<j>epovTa koI oTrXas • iSeTiacrav
¦7rT(a)(ol Kttt eutfipavd-^Tijiarav. Kat TraXti' Xe-yef ®va-ov t<5 Oe(S Ova-iav atveo-ctos,
Kat aTrdoos T<3 v\piuTio ras ev^as <rou" Kat eirtKaXccrai p,e iv -rjp,epa ^Xii/feols
(TOV, KUl i^eXov/ial ere, kol So^acrets /«.£ • Ova-ia yap t<3 ©e<3 ¦nvivp.a (TWTerpLjJ.-
p-evov. Ps. Ixix. - 31. — Atv£0-aj TO ovojxa tov ®eo5 p.ov fier' taSyj';, p,eyaXvv!i>
a-uTov iv atveo-et. Kat apeau to! ®ew irrlp p,6crxov veov Kcpara tK^epovTa Kat
OTrXas. ISeTcoo-av tttw^^ol kol £v<f>pav6iQTioirav.
Ps. 1. 14, quoted exactly ; and Ps. li. 17 joined to it.

The following is of a very different character. It is startling in its
extraordinary combination, if combination it be :—
Clement, C. 29, 4. — Kat iv irepio totto) Xt-yef 'iSou Kvptos Xaix/Sdvei
iavT(a e6voi ek /xia-crv i6vS)v, wo-irep Xafi^dvei avOponro^ rrjv a.Trapxr]V avrov
r^s aXw Kat e^cXeijo-erat £k toS eOvov^ eKCivov dyia ayLoiv.
There is no such passage, but it may be supposed to be a blending of—
Num. xviii. 27. — Kat Xoyto-^ijo-eTat vpiv TO, acj^aipe/Mxra vp.S>v us o-tros
airo aXio, Kat a<f>aipe[Ji.a aTro Xr;vou.
Deut. iv. 34. — Et iireipaa-ev 6 ©eos elo-eXOlbv Xa^eiv iavriS tOvo? ek
juecrou e^vovs ev rreipaa-pw, Kal ev a->][JLewK, Kal ev repaxri, k.t.X.
2 Chron. xxxi. 14. — Kat Kop-^ o toC 'le/^va o Aeutrjjs o iruXajpos Kara
dvaToXas e-irl tS)V hop-drw, Sowai Tas dirapxas Kvptoi;, Kat ra a-yta ruiv ayiwv,
K.T.X. The foUowing may be taken as a specimen of inaccurate quotation
from memory : —
Clement, C. 3. 1, to -yeypa/i/teVoi/.— 'E^ayev Kat imev, Kal tirXaTvV^iy Kat
e7ra)(yvOr] Kat dircXaKTtcrei' o ¦fjyainjfi.evo'S.
' I had prepared a full list of Clement's quotations from the Old Testament, with
the view of sustaining the position here taken up, but ere these sheets were printed
I found it had been already done by Dr Sanday—' Gospels in the Second Cent., p. 2b.

XIV INTEODUCTION.
Deut. xxxii. 15. — Kat e<f>ayev 'IaKU)/S Kat ive-TrX-qa-B-r], Kal wTreXaKTicrev o
•^a'Tnjp.evoi, iXiirdvOrj, iTraxyvOrj, eTrXarvvOrj.

The following is a case of expansion of his original. Some suppose
his authority to have been an apocryphal or interpolated Ezekiel ; but
of the existence of such a book there is great doubt. See Lightfoot's
" Note." Clement, c. 8, 2. — ZS> yap iyiii, Xeyei Kvptos, o-v /SovXofjiai tov
Odvarov tov ap,apTo}Xov, ws ttjv fierdvoiav rrpoa-TiOel^ Kal yvwpirjv
ayaQ-qv MeTavo^craTC, otKos Itrpa-^X, aTro t^s dvop,tas v/jlSiV etwor TOts
utots TOV Xaov /toi) • Eav Sia-iv at dfiapTLai vp.Siv drro t^s yrj^ £(os toC ovpa-
vov, Kal eav uxriv -irvppoTepai kokkov Kal p-eXavmrepai crdKKcrv, Kal iTrUTTpa^rjTe
wpds p.e e^ oXrjs rrj's KapSt'as Kai ehrr)Te • Jldrep, iiraKovcrop,aL v/jiZv <l)s Xaov
d-ytov. Ezek. xxxiii. 11. — Zoi e-yw, TaSe Xeyet Kvptos, ov ^o-vXop,aL tov
OdvaTov TOV dcreySovs <J)S diroa-rpeij/ai toi/ da-ejiyj diro t^s 68ov
avTOv, Kat t,rjv avrov.
Compare Ps. ciii. 10 ; Jer. iii. 19 ; Is. i. 18 ; Ezek. xviii. 30.
This, then, was Clement's way of quoting the Old Testament. He
alters, he fuses ; sometimes he quotes correctly ; sometimes we are in
clined to suppose an apocryphal book to have been in his mind.
Let us now turn to

Clement's relation to New Testament Passages.
The references under John's Gospel, p. 170, and notes, contain
enough to show his mode of quotation of the words of Jesus.
The first one (on page 104) from c. 13 is perplexing. If it is not
from one of the canonical Gospels, we know not whence it was taken.
To assume (1) thatit is necessarily from some othgr written source, and
(2) that the source was the " Gospel of the Hebrews," or the " Preach
ing of Peter," or the " Gospel of the Nazarenes," is to invent machinery
for disposing of the difficulty. And against the assumption of some
well-known written source, other than our Gospels ('Sup. Eel.'), is
the fact that the same part of the Sermon on the Mount is quoted by
Polycarp with equal variations from our Gospels,^ but not the same
variations as here. It is not a more remarkable change of the original
than those we have quoted from the Old Testament.
1 See Introduction on Polycarp ; and Polycarp's words in our text, p. 112, with
note on Polycarp's use of his authority.

CLEMENT OF EOME. XV
On the whole, we conclude with Lightfoot that, " as Clement's
quotations are often very loose, we need not go beyond the canonical
Gospels for the source of this passage."
The extract from c. 46 (p. 105) seems to be a quotation from memory.
The passages combined are just such as would naturally be combined
in memory, although they are far apart in the Gospels. Compare
Mat. xxvi. 24, xviii. 6 ; Mark ix. 42 ; Luke xvii. 1, 2. Tertullian tells
us that Marcion's Gospel contained in the beginning of chap. xvii. of
our St Luke the interpolation, " Expedisse ei, si natus non fuisset," &c.,
which may be an echo of this reading pf Clement's, or a proof of a
widespread traditional rendering.
The words (c. 44), " And our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus
Christ that there shall be strife on account of the overseership," ^ is
mainly remarkable because it is the precursor of many similar references
in subsequent writers. Justin quotes as a saying of Jesus, " There
shall be schisms and heresies." ^ The Clementine Homilies make it more
explicit : " There shall be, as the Lord said, false apostles, false prophets,
heresies, desires for supremacy." ^ And Hegesippus may refnte them,
when he says, " From these came the false Christs, false prophets,
false apostles, who divided the unity of the Church." * Those who refer
these passages to some current written Gospel, have to account for
the extreme freedom of the variations : and it does not seem possible
to do so without adopting the very principle on which they refuse to
proceed, when they object to canonical books as the probable source
of divergent quotations. (See text, p. 125, and note.)
There is a chapter (c. 24) on the Eesurrection, which is full of
phrases suggesting the New Testament. It is said that the Lord
T-^v drrap^v eTroi-rja-aTO tov Kvptoi/ Iv Xv eK veKpZv di/ao-Tiycras- We have
also eirjX6ev 6 crrreCptiiv (Mat. xiii. 3), and a doctrinal use of the fact
that the seed from its death brings forth fruit (1 Cor. xv. 36 ; John xii.
24). And we have a solemn use of the words, o aX-rjOivbs Kal /xdvos [©cos],
which Keim^ admits to be an allusion to John.
To cite here, or even to give a classification of the innumerable
phrases in Clement which suggest the New Testament, is beyond our
limits. The principal passages in full, and references to many more, will
be found in the text :^ but no one can read the Epistle without seeing
^ "Kol ot aTr6(no\oi rj/iav iyvoiaav Sick rov 'Kvpiov rifiiiv lv Xv Sti epir ^ittoi iirl tov
.ovSfiaTos TTJs iTTta-Koirris."
2 ""Effovrat a-xiirtiura Kal aipea-eis."
^ ""Ea-ovrai yip as 6 Kilptos elizev, \fievSaTr6a-To\oi, ^evSels irpo^^Toi, alpetreis, ^iXap-
X^oi." — Hom. xvi. 21. _ ^
* " 'Airb Toiraiv tfievSixptiTTOi, \l/evSovpo<l>rjrat, \f/evSaTr6(rro\oi, o'inves ifiepta-av tV
evcocrtv Trjs ^/ckAtjitios." — Eus. H. E. IV. 22. At the same time the words of Hege
sippus are as near to Mat. xxiv. 24.
5 See Jes. v. Naz., i. 141.
" Special reference may be made to the numerous passages cited or referred to
under Heb., 1 Tim., 2 Tim., Tit., and 1 Pet.

XVI INTEODUCTION.
that its author's mind is steeped in the thoughts, doctrines, and associa
tions which are preserved to us in Scripture. It is entirely beyond the
power of lists and figures to convey an idea of the strength of the
witness for the perpetuity of the first characteristics of Christianity,
which we find in the outpouring of the heart of this " ep-apostolic "
teacher, i Only a perusal can give the impression,— but it is one which
can never be forgotten. The incarnation of the pre-existent Christ, who
had spoken before by the mouth of the Seers ; and the blood by which
we are saved ; and the resurrection of the crucified Christ ; and the spirit
by which our life should be ruled,^of these truths the mind of Clement
is full. He closes what we may term a prose poem in c. 49 with
these words : " In love the Lord (6 Seo-ttotjjs) took us towards Himself;
for the love which He had towards us, Jesus Christ our Lord (Kvptos),
according to the will of God, gave His blood on our account, and His
flesh for our flesh, and His blood for our blood."
Justification by Faith with Works, — as the enlightened Christian
conscience has without formula set the doctrine clear before itself, —
this is the teaching of Clement. We may hear St James and St Paul
speak with blended voice, although the tone of James is more distinct,
when Clement says (c. 30, 3) : " Let us therefore cleave to those to whom
grace has been given from God ; let us put on like-mindedness with them,
being lowly of mind, self -restraining, putting ourselves far apart from all
murmuring and evil speaking, being justified by works and not by words."
Many of the phrases are Petrine also, so that we see in Clement the
disciple of all the chief apostles.^
Or we may hear what seems to be Clement's own more personal
thought, following perhaps the "blessed Paul" (c. 32, 4): "All the
saints of old were glorified and magnified, not through themselves, or their
works, or their righteous deeds which they achieved, but through His will.
And we therefore, being called by His ivill in Christ Jesus, are not justified
through ourselves, or through our wisdom, or prudence, or piety, or works
which we did in purity of heart, but through the faith through which the
Almighty God somehow justified all men from all ages: to whom be glory
everlasting." If we would see how Clement's grateful heart made the Personal
Saviour the centre of his life, we only need to turn to c. 36. If
we would see how he extends the application of Paul's praise of love,
in words which remind us of the Lord Himself in John's Gospel, and
of Peter as well, we find c. 49 full of meaning for us.^
' Donaldson, Apostolic Fathers, p. 101.
2 KoWriBaiiev — see Acts v. 13, viii. 26, &c., as illustrating the close companion
ship of the early Christians. 'Ta-!reivo(ppovovvTes — see Acts xx. 19 ; Col. iii, 12 •
1 Pet. V. 5. 'EyKparevdfievoi — see 1 Cor. ix. 25. -ViBvpia-fidv — see 2 Cor. xii. 20.
KoToAoAiai— see 2 Cor. xii. 20 ; 1 Pet. ii. 1 (not a classical word). Tl6^^a> eavrobs
iroioScTcs— comp. 1 Pet. ii. 1, hroBeiievoi, and James i. 21, 22. "Epyots SiKaiov/ievot 
see James ii. 24, ^| ^pytav SiKotouTai.
^ Compare the first words, '0 ex"" ay&jrriv iv Xpurr^ -iroi.ria6.Ta rh. toC Xpiarov

CLEMENT OF EOME. kvii
It is quite true that this correspondence between Clement (the
same applies to Polycarp) and the canonical writers, to which we here
refer, is not one of quotations which can be weighed or counted with
mathematical exactness ; but it is not for all that to be lightly esteemed.
If we had to construct the scheme of Christian Theology from those
writers, we should certainly have considerable difficulty, because of the
unstudied way in which they write, aud also because of the vagueness
of their ideas on doctrine. Their aim" is mainly ethical. They are
exhorting Christians to constancy in the faith ; to brotherly kindness ;
to submission to lawful authority ; they are teaching no doctrine
save by implication ; and theology and criticism find little to claim in
their writings. But, on the other hand, they manifest in every page,
and almost in every line, the power of a religion based upon the
truths of our Gospel. The men have rested their faith upon Jesus
Christ as their Saviour ; they have done that once for all ; and now
they are occupied in living up to the requirements of Christianity in
daily life. It is not that they have no knowledge of Christian truth as
a system, — they founded upon St Paul's Epistles, and therefore must
have had a theology, — but they are dealing with Christian life and prac
tical religion. When regarded in this their true light, these Epistles
of Clement and Polycarp furnish an argument for the canon, by imply
ing far more than they express. They imply the previous acceptance
of the existing documents and doctrines of the New Testament : and
the very fact that in the case of those to whom they were writing, as
in their own, they constantly assume that the religion of Jesus Christ
has been kuown and believed, is a powerful testimony to the acceptance
of the same facts, and the prevalence of the same truth. We may see
that Clement knew his readers to be more familiar with the life of
Jesus Christ than with the biographies of Old Testament saints ;
for when he speaks of Abraham or Moses or David, he thinks it
necessary to remind them of the general characters of the life, where
as a simple allusion to the facts of the history of Jesus Christ is
enough. If the Tiibingen theories as to the origin of Christianity, and to the
manufacture of canonical books, were well founded, or even possibly
correct, those writings of the " Apostolical Fathers " could not have
been what they are. For at the very time when, according to Baur,
Christianity was tom with an internal conflict between the factions
of Peter and Paul; at the very time when the victorious Pauline
party were manufacturing letters and histories in the name and in
the supposed interests of the great Apostle of the Gentiles ; — at that
irapayyeXfiara, with John xiv. 15, and 1 John v. 1. Compare ay i-nn KaKimrei TrXrfios
afiaprtuv with 1 Pet. iv. 8. Compare iv aydirri ireXeuliB-naav with 1 John ii. 5 and
1 John iv. 18. The burden of the chapter, as a whole, is evidently taken from
1 Cor. xuL b

XVIII INTEODUCTION.
very time appeared those letters of Clement and Polycarp, showing in
every unstudied line the general acceptance of the Gospel narratives,
and of the Epistles now found in our New Testament.
Second Epistle.
A Homily of the second century falsely ascribed to Clement.
When all that we knew of the so-called " Second Epistle " was the
fragment found in Cod. A, it was difficult to say anything very certain
about it. But now that the whole has been found in Greek and in
Syriac, there can be no doubt of the truth of what was (since' Grabe)
believed by many before, that it is not an Epistle, but a Homily. We
read in Justin and Tertullian, and we may perhaps infer from Pliny,
that after the reading of the Scriptures in the Christian congregations
of the second century, it was usual for the President, or some one de
puted by him, to exhort the people : 'and who has not longed for some
specimen of the words which were spoken on such occasions — words
that nourished the simple but strong faith of the early Church ?
What was longed for is now in our hands.^ Whether the Homilist was
a Presbyter, whose ordinary function was to teach, or some one speak
ing on some exceptional occasion, may be doubtful (see chapters 17
and 19) — is indeed disputed among eminent critics ; but that it was an
address of the usual character, only so acceptable as to be widely cir
culated and carefully preserved, we need not doubt at all.
Was it, then, the work of Clement ? We can scarcely suppose that
Clement, when speaking for himself, would have spoken as one who
was accustomed to be exhorted by the Presbyters, yet this writer does
so speak (c. 17), This alone makes us conclude against the theory
that the Homily was Clement's. Other reasons have been advanced
to the same effect, but they are of less moment. The theology of the
Homily is said to be of later date than that of Clement's genuine
Epistle ; and the view of the New Testament is regarded as more
advanced. But arguments on this basis are precarious ; and they can
be met by assertions on the other side, to the effect that we cannot
fairly compare the theology of a sermon with that of a letter, and
that the vagueness of the references to the New Testament Epistles,
and the apparent absence of a Bishop in the Church, indicate an even
earlier date than Clement's day.
All that we can say for certain is, that the Homily does not seem to
be Clement's,^ but is of old date, and was so highly valued as to be
^ As in Clement's Epistle we have the oldest public prayer of the Christian Church
so in this Homily we have the oldest Christian sermon extant. See Jacobi Stud
U. Kritiken, 1876 (4).
2 Bryennios gallantly defends his thesis, that Clement is the author ; but he has
nothing save a partial tradition on his side.

CLEMENT OF ROME. xix
bound up with the Epistle of Clement, though how it came to be
ascribed to him as its author we can only conjecture. External evi
dence of its antiquity is not of much assistance to us. Eusebius^ is
the first to mention it : and his uncomplimentary remark is that,
though it is ascribed to Clement, he has no assurance of its having
been used in old times, and that it is by no means to be put on a
level with the first Epistle. In the fifth century the pseudo-Justin
calls it " Clement's to the Corinthians." The allusions in the sixth
century are so uncertain as to make nothing clear, save the fact that
it was not at that time universally accepted as Clement's.
But if not Clement's, whose was it ? That we cannot say. Some
indeed find in its references to Scripture the same point of view as in
Barnabas ; others think it is so like Hermas, as to be by the same au
thor ; others would persuade us that it is the work of Clement of Alex
andria.^ It is easy to conjecture, but apparently impossible to ascertain.
But if by an unknown author, where did he speak it ? In Eome, in
Corinth, or where ? From its earliest known history, one is inclined
to suppose that it was addressed (as Clement's letter was) to the
Corinthian Church ; and the allusions to the games go to favour the
same conclusion. The Homilist not only speaks with evidently full
knowledge of the proceedings in the contests, but his language im
plies that he was near the spot at which the " crowds land to take
part in the games." ^ That he was a Gentile appears from his allusions
to the past history of his " people " and his " church " — c. 1,6; c. 2,
1, 3. We have probability on our side, when we say that it was spoken
in Corinth, and therefore came eventually to be put alongside ,of Cle
ment's -Epistle to the church in that place.
What is the date of the Homily? In this as in other questions
affecting the date of writings of the second century, we have to see
what form of Gnosticism seems to have been in the author's -view.
Applying this test, we cannot fail to observe that he is a vigorous
assailant of that phase of Gnosticism which denied the resurrection of
the body, — or rather the resurrection of the flesh (t^s o-apKos). The
earliest Gnosticism took that form ; the fundamental dogma of all
Gnosticism, the sinfulness of matter, naturally produced it ; we see
it even iu the Pauline Epistles ; and we are led towards the conclusion,
that the preacher spoke at no later date than the beginning of the
second century. To the same effect is the consideration that he uses
language which he would probably have avoided, had the speculations
of Valentinus and Marcion been known to him. For these reasons, it
1 H. E. III. 38.
^ See Hilg. Proleg., p. xlix. Several of the quotations undoubtedly call Clement of
Alexandria to mind. Dodwell first suggested this. The use of the Gospel of the
Egyptians is common to both the Homilist and the great Christian Sophist.
" KaTaTr\iova-iv — see Lightf., pp. 197, 306.

XX INTEODUCTION.
is natural to fix some time between a.d. 120 and a.d. 140 as the
date. But, on the other hand, we must remember that this was really
a popular sermon, not a philosophical treatise, nor even a written
Epistle ; and that its author had evidently in view the practical end
of warning men not to indulge in lusts which would defile the body
that is destined to rise again. The greatness of the present life, be
cause in it the Christian works out the great salvation which Christ
purchased for him — that is the preacher's theme, as against those who
held the Gnostic tenets of the incurable sinfulness of matter, and
the immortality of mind alone. We may well hesitate to conclude
that the preacher knew no subtler form of Gnosticism than that which
he vigorously denounces. It was still specially needful, as before, in
Corinth, to urge men to discipline the body, and to live according to
the purity of the Gospel (see c. 4, 6 ; 7, 15) ; and we can easily
believe that this pressing need filled the earnest teacher's mind, so
that he would not dwell on the intricacies of speculations whose evil
results were more indirect or more remote, even though such specula
tions might be known to him.
In short, although there is no reason to fix a date later than a.d.
120-140, there is not much in the views taken of Gnosticism to com
pel us to come to that, or any other very definite conclusion. The
Homily might have been spoken a generation later, or even later still.
The mode of quoting Scripture furnishes, in point of fact, the only
valid argument for its being a work of the second century — and before
the last years of that century. " No representative of the Catholic
Church in the end of the century would have stood in the same per
plexing relation to the " Scriptures " and the " Gospel " and the
" words of the Lord " as this preacher, who quoted indiscriminately the
Old Testament and the New Testament and the Apocryphal books,
the canonical Gospels and the lost Gospel of the Egyptians.
Wheu we look at one side, the testimony to our Scriptures is explicit
and ample. The author (c. 2) quotes Mat. ix. 13 as ypa.<jyq, — in this
reminding us of Barnabas ; and he uses the same word for the Old
Testament (c. 6, 14). Words introduced (c. 8) with "Thus saith
the Lord in the Gospel" seem to be a blending of Luke xvi. 10 with
Mat. xxv. 21. "Thus saith the Lord" is his most usual formula for
the New Testament (co. 3, 4 ; 6, 9) ; and he uses it for the Old Tes
tament also (co. 13, 15). In one place (c. 14) he alludes in general
terms to the Old and New Testament as to. /3t/3Xta Kat ot dirdoToXoi,
saying that they are not the Church, because the Church is spiritual.
The reading is doubtful, but it is to this effect.^
^ Hilgenfeld inserts in c. 10 a passage bearing on the canon, in which the Old Tes
tament and New Testament aud the Sibyl are enumerated as Scriptures : oi' ypaipvu
rrpoipvTav re Kal i.iroar6\av, en re Kal rrii <Ti$i\\ris. His authority is found in some
extracts bearing the name of John of Damascus (eighth century). But even this re-

CLEMENT OF EOME. Xxi
Nor is this all. In one notable passage, after quoting the Old
Testament as " Thus saith the Lord," he goes on to cite the words of
Jesus Christ from the New Testament as "God saith" (c. 13). In
another place he describes the reading of the Scriptures as hearing
the God of Truth : indeed his words are even stronger, and must be
quoted, — " Wherefore, brethren and sisters, after the God of Truth, I
now read^ you an exhortation to attend to the things which have been
written, so that you may both save yourselves and him who readeth
among you" (c. 19). Inc. 13 he refers toXoyta tov ®eov, so as to show
that he means either the very words or the substance of the Christian
writings which Christians made known to the Gentiles. In this he
may be regarded as illustrating the much-disputed words of Papias
that Matthew wrote the Xdyta tov ®cov (Eus. H. E. III. 39). If there
be any ambiguity in the Homilist' s words — if we cannot say without
hesitation that he refers to the ' Evangelical Eecord ' (Lightfoot),
rather than to its substance — we may undoubtedly say that there is
the same ambiguity as to substance and record in Eom. iii. 2, Heb. v.
12 ; and that, at all events, there is not good ground for believing (with
many modern critics) that Xdyta in the case of Papias meant a collec
tion of Christ's sayings, as distinct from an account of His works.
So far all seems clear. But there is another side. The author (c.
4) quotes in some places as " The Lord said " words which we do not
find iu our Gospels (chaps. 4 and 5) ; and as he reports a dialogue be
tween our Lord and some one which Clement of Alexandria ascribes
to the " Gospel according to the Egyptians," it has been supposed
that some of his other passages are taken from the same source. In
another passage he refers to the prophetic word for a solemnly cited quo
tation, which seems to come from some Old Testament apocryphal book.
The sarne passage with variations is quoted as ypcK^i? in' the Epistle of
Clement (c. 23). . In other cases he seems to re-echo the books of Tobit
and Ecclesiasticus. There is no evidence that he knew the writings
of John : the Pauline Epistles to the Ephesians and to Timothy are
apparently quoted or echoed, but there is not any avowed founding
upon New Testament Epistles as authorities.
On the whole, we conclude with some perplexity that the Homily
was spoken at a period when a distinction between canonical and apo
cryphal writings was not sharply drawn as regards the New Testament ;
that the time for doctrinal inferences from the Pauline Epistles had
not yet come ; and that the use made of the Old Testament Apocrypha
cent authority is doubtful, and the origin of the extracts remains obscure. Some
ascribe them to other pseudo-Clementine writings. Recent experience does not dis
pose us to deny the possibility of some gap in even our present form of the MS.
But see Bryennios, Proleg. p|a', and Hilg. Pat Apost., p. 85. ^^
1 Bryennios emphatically notes that the speaker "read," and did not "deliver
his discourse (hieyivaoKev ovk ctire(rT^fli|e).

XXll INTEODUCTION.
and of the " Egyptian " Gospel, as well as the general cast of thought,
warrant us in believing that, by education or by predilection, the un
known preacher was in some special way connected with the Chris
tian Church in Alexandria.
The darkness in which the date, place, and authorship are involved,
makes this ancient sermon more curious than valuable to the inquirer
into Canonicity.
The chief references to the New Testament are : —
C. 1,1. KptT^s ^(iiVTWV Kal veKpwv. — Acts x. 42.
2, 4. erepa Se ypa<j>rj Xeyet oTt ovk rjXOov KaXecrai otKaiovs dXXa dfiap-
TwXovs. — Mat. ix. 13; Mark ii. 17.
3, 2. Xeyet Se Kat avTos" tov bp,oXoyqa-avrd p,e evdnnov tS>v dvOpayn-oyv,
op-oXoyrjcrtii avrov h/umiov tov irarpo's p-ov. — Mat. X. 32
(free).
4, 2. Xeyet ydp • ov ttSs 6 Xeywi' fJLOi, Kvpte, Kvpte, a-iaO-rjcreTai, dXX o Trotoiv
Trjv hiKaioa-vvrpf. — Mat. vii. 21 (free).
6, 1. Xeyet Sc 6 Kvptos* ovSets otKenjs SvvaTat Svcrt Kvploti SovXevctv.
— Luke xvi. 1 3.
6, 2. Tt yap TO ocf>eXo?, idv Tts tov K6a-p.ov oXov Kep^-iqcrg Tqv Se ijnJXTjv
^T/jp-uoO-rj ; — Mat. xvi. 26.
8, 5. Xeyet yap o Kvptos iv tw eva-yyeXua- et to p.iKpov ovk eTYjp-qcraTe,
TO /ieya Tts v/juv SuJo-et; Xe'yo) ydp vp,lv on 6 irto-Tos ev iXa)(i-
a-Tia Kal iv ttoXXw ttio-to^ ioTW. — Luke xvi. 10 j Mat. xxv.
21.'
9, 5. Xpto-Tos o Kvptos, o o-o)cras ^p.as, ojv p.ev to ¦n-pdrov rrvevfia, iyevero
a-dp^. — John i. 14.
9, 11. dSeXtjiOL p,ov ovToi elcFiv ot -irotovvTes to OeXrjpu tov ¦jrarpo'S p.ov. —
Mat. xii. 49.
11, 7. Xrj\j/6p,e0a Tas eTrayycXtas, as ovs ovk rjKOva-ev ovSe 6(f)6aXp,6i etSev,
ovSe eTTt KapSlav dvOpunrov dve^rj. — 1 Cor. ii. 9, altered from
LXX.
13, 3. Xdyta tov ©eov. — Cf. Eom. iii. 2 ; Heb. v. 12.
13, 4. OTav ydp dKdvo-tocrt Trap -rip-Zv OTt Xeyet 6 ©eds" ov X°-P''^ vfxiv el
dyarrdre Tovs dyajruivTas vp.d'S, dXXd X-dpus vp.1v et dyairaTe
Toiis ix^pov^ Kal tovs p-ttrovvTas vp.as. — Luke vi. 32-35 (free).
14, 2. (cKKXijo-ta ^Sxra) (j-S>p.d ecm Xpto-Tov. — Eph. i. 23, &o.
1 6, 4. dydrrrj Se KaXvirret rrX-ij^os dpapnwv. — 1 Peter iv. 8.
18, 2. StwKeiv StKatoorvvijv. — 1 Tim. vi. 11, &c.
19, 2. ia-KOTLo-pevoL rrjv Stavot'av. — Eph. iv. 18 (Clem. Ep. c. 36).
20, 5. T(i5 p,dvft) ®e(3 dopdrio. — 1 Tim. i. 17.

CLEMENT OP EOME. Xxlil
The following may be regarded as echoes of the New Testament :—
C. 1, 5. dvTt/tto-^tas, and also c. 15, 2. — Eom. i. 27 ; 2 Cor. vi. 13.
2, 8. eKaXeo-ev ydp ij/ids ovk ovTas. — Eom. iv. 17 J 1 Coi. i. 29.
1. also 2. dxoXXvp.ei'ovs -f/p-ds ecrwcrev.
6, 9. TrapaKXijTos. — Luke xix. 10, &c.
8, 6. Tj;petv do-TTtXov. — 1 Tim. vi. 14; James i. 27 — here referring
to baptism as o-ijtpayts. In C. 6, 9 it is Tijpetv to pdrrrio-pa
dyvov Kol dp.LavTov — -see also c. 7, 6. Compare 2 Cor. i.
22; Eph. iv. 30; Eev. ix. 4, for the New Testament
meaning of the seal and covenant.
14, 3. ^Oeip-g, as in 1 Cor. iii. 17.
15, 1. eavTov crtocret Kdp,e tov a-vp-jBovXeva-avTa. — 1 Tim. iv. 16. See
also c. 19.
p,[a-6o^ ydp ovk tcTTi. p,tKpos -TrXavotpevrjv i^x'^" i^"-'- drroXXvpevrjV
d-TTocrTpeij/ai ets to o-u^^vat. — James v. 20.
19, 1. cTKoirov, as in Phil. iii. 14.
Other Epistles ascribed to Clement.
Two Epistles on Virginity were published by Wetstein from the
Syriac (in which alone they exist) as an Appendix to his Greek Tes
tament, 1752. They quote from the New Testament as found in the
Syrian Canon : and they are themselves bound up with 2 Peter, 2 and
3 John, and Jude, in an Appendix to the Syriac New Testament.
They seem to have been known to Epiphanius and Jerome, and were
probably written originally in Greek by some one connected with the
Eastern Church. Westcott assigns them to the middle of the second
century. All the books of the Peshito New Testament are quoted (save
Mark and Philemon, probably omitted by accident) — see Westcott,
Canon, p. 167 ; Lightfoot, Corinthians, p. 18. These two Epistles
were regarded by the Syrian Church as genuine works of Clement.
Epistle to James tlie Lord's Brother, found prefixed to the Clementine
Homilies.^ It claims to give a narrative of Clement's appointment by
Peter to be Bishop of Eome ; and to furnish also the Apostle's injunc
tions as to Church government. It is found in an enlarged form
among the forged Papal Decretals. It may also date in its Greek
form from the second century ; and its Latin version (Eufinus) is of
the fourth.
A Second Epistle to James. It is a forgery of much later date — pro
bably of the fifth century. It refers to ritualistic minutiae, church
furniture, and such like. It is mentioned here because the Western
Church, which lost all traces of the genuine Epistles of Clement, and
^ See Antenicene Library, vol. xvii.

xxiv INTRODUCTION.
of the venerable Homily, seems to have regarded the two Epistles
to James as the genuine Epistles of Clement.
There were many other forgeries in Clement's name during the
subsequent centuries — see Lightfoot, Clement, p. 21.

IIL— HEEMAS.
This book bears but slightly upon our inquiry regarding the canon.
It is the work of the Bunyan of the Church of the second century. It
is a succession of visions and mystic teachings, called " The Shepherd,"
because the author describes the angel who instructed him as " a man
of glorious aspect, dressed like a shepherd, with a white skin, a wallet
on his shoulders, and a staff in his hand." ^ It is full of practical teach
ing, and contains not a few passages which may be styled beautiful ;
but it is not an interesting book. It is a distinctively Christian, per
haps Judseo-Christian, book, and is evidently written for those who,
knowing the doctrines of the Gospel, needed to have its pure moral
requirements impressed on them. One can believe that it served some
what of the same purpose in its day as the miracle-plays and the sacred
allegories of the Eeformation period did afterwards, or as the Ober-
Ammergau festival does in our own day. But for those who seek
unequivocal traces, not of Christianity only, but of the use of our
canonical books, or of other Christian-books regarded as Scripture, there
is little in the Shepherd of Hermas. Through its theology one may
come to certain conclusions, but it is not our present purpose to follow
that path. It shows us a clear faith in the living God and in the
suffering and exalted Saviour, and we might show from it the continuity
of Christian doctrine. There are difficulties, however, even in the
theology. Whether Hermas clearly distinguished between Christ and
the Holy Ghost (Sim. IX. 1), or what he meant in every case by the
words " Son of God " as descriptive of Christ, we cannot here inquire.^
It is enough for us to say that there is only one quotation from the New
Testament that can be identified (Vis. II. 2 ; Mat. x. 33), and one dis
tinct allusion (Vis. II. 8) to an apocryphal book, when he says that
Heldad and Modad prophesied to the people in the wilderness.*
^ Vision V.
^ For the theology of Hermas see Donaldson, " Apostolical Fathers " (1874). See
2 Clem. t. 14, 4, 5, for identification of Clirist and the Spirit.
¦* The names are in Num. xi. 26, &c. The Apocryphal book is named in the
" Synopsis of Athanasius."

HEEMAS. xxv
There are many passages which may fairly be taken as " echoes " of
words and thoughts of the New Testament. Especially are we re
minded of James, and of Peter, Efnd of the Apocalypse, though the
works of Paul are also frequently suggested.
The " Shepherd" was highly thought of in the early Church, both in
east and west. There seems no good reason to doubt the statement^
that it was written by Hermas while its author's brother was Bishop
of Eome, so that it dates from about a.d. 142. That it belongs to
the ep-apostolic age in any closer way is most improbable.^ But
there is no doubt that if we have given the right date it attained to great
popularity very soon, for Irenaeus seems to quote it (though he does
not name it) with marked approval, — koXcos ovv eurev 17 ypa(j>-rj. Clement
of Alexandria speaks of it as divinely spoken, and by revelation : and
Origen says, " I think it divinely inspired." Tertullian; on the other
hand (after he became a Montanist), not only denounced it as the
book that " loves adulterers," but says that even the synods of the
orthodox counted it spurious. His objection was that it allowed a
fallen Christian to be restored. It cannot have been an old book in
his time. (See Westcott, Canon, p. 179, for proofs of its being of the
age when Montanism began.) Eusebius sets it among the disputed
or the spurious books. (See H. E. IIL 3, III. 25, and V. 8.)
The recent discovery of a part of Hermas in the Sinaitic codex has
so far furnished scholars with Hermas in Greek ; from which, and
from the Leipsic codex, and the various Latin versions, Hilgenfeld
(1866) and Gebhardt and Harnack (1877) have set themselves to con
struct the Greek in full.* There is also an jEthiopic version (pub
lished 1860), with a modern Latin rendering, of which use has been
• Muratorian Canon. Hilgenfeld suggests that one so nearly connected with the
superintendents of the Church would not have rated them so soundly as ignorant and
emulous of each other (see Vis. III. 9, &c. ; Hilgenf., Pat. Apost., Proleg. Hermas,
p. 15). It may also be doubted whether the author does not seem to be an uneducated
man, of hazy theology and imperfect powers of expression. But still the statement
of the Muratorian fragment may be adhered to.
^ It is hopeless to connect it with the Hermas of Rom. xvi. 14, although Origen
thinks it possible. It speaks of the death of the Apostles as past ; and it speaks of
Christians as tried by law, and judicially condemned to the wild beasts. Judicial
proceedings were subsequent to 'Trajan's rescript, and possibly we may find in this
way that its earliest date is Hadrian's reign (beginning a.d. 138). We thus con
firm the Muratori.an date.
3 See Hilgenfeld, Prolog., p. 1, and Donaldson, Apost. Fiithers, p. 383, &c., for full
accounts of the forgery of a Greek version of part of the book by Simonides, and the
suspicions entertained of his work, and even of Tischendorf's. This last reference
Westcott (Canon, p. 190) does not meet. (See Reuss, Gesch., s. 275.) Geb. and Har.
(Hermas, Proleg., 1877) point out the difficulties in the way of supposing the Greek
of Hermas (as we have it) to be a translation from the Latin. If Hermas wrote in
Greek, then the Greek and the Latin version of it have been lost ; if he wrote in
Latin, the original Latin and the first Greek of it have been lost : and to add to the
pei-plexity, the Greek which we have is not a rendering of either or both of the Latin
versions which we have (the very corrupt common Latin, and the Palatine MS, which
differs from the common one).

XXVI INTEODUCTION.
made ; and there are numerous quotations in Greek critics, especially
Clem. Alex., pseudo-Athanasius, and Antiochus, a monk of the seventh
century. But the origin of the Greek of Hermas is still a problem
only partially solved.

IV.— IGNATIUS.

There is great difficulty in making any use of the Ignatian testimony
to the canonical books, because it is very uncertain how much Ignatius,
Bishop of Antioch, actually wrote of what bears his name. If we
could assume that the early traditions of his death, in the time of Tra
jan, A.D. 115, are true, his testimony would be specially valuable. He
was, in that case, not only the contemporary of the post-apostolic
Fathers, but was probably alive during, or soon after, Christ's Hfe on
earth.^ But the fifteen epistles ascribed to him have been, and still are, the
subject of infinite debate. Eight of them ^ are now universally admitted
to be spurious, as they are full of anachronisms, and of divergence from
the quotations during the first five centuries, and were not only unknown
to Eusebius, but, so far as can be seen, to aU other Greek vsriters up to
the sixth century. But even when those are removed from the field,
disputes arise as to the seven which remain. There are seven enum
erated by Eusebius,^ and the notes and references which he gives cor
respond with seven whioh are preserved in Greek, Latin, and Armenian.
But, first of all, we have two Greek recensions of them — a longer and
a shorter — one of which must, of Course, be spurious. The form in
which they were known to exist when Calvin and others rightly de
nounced them as spurious was what is now usually called the longer
recension. Voss published six of the shorter form in Greek (1646),
1 A tradition of uncertain origin describes him as the child whom Jesus took in
His arms (Mat. xviii. 3). But this seems to have arisen from mistaking @eo(p6pos,
the title which he gives himself, with ®e6(pop0i (carried by God). In the Martyr.
Ign. Colb., c. 2, it is said to mean li Xptirrhv exav iv trrepvois.
^ One to the Virgin Mary ; two to the Apostle John (these are only in Latin) ; one to
Mary of Cassobolac ; oue each to Tarsians, Antiochians, Hero of Antioch, Philippians.
There are also one or two letters to Ignatius in the full pseudo-Ignatian collection.
^ The seven are addressed to Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadel-
phians, Smy.rnseans, Polycarp. Eusebius (H. E. III. 36) tells us about them, saying
that Ignatius wrote the first-named three from Smyrna, where Polycarp was ; and not
only gives several references which are found in the letters we have, but quotes a long
passage in which Ignatius entreats the Romans not to prevent him from winning the
crown of martyrdom. He adds similarly that the others were written from Smyrna.

IGNATIUS. XXVH
and the seventh (to the Eomans) was published afterwards by Euinart
in 1689. All agree that the discovery of the shorter recension (in
Latin, by Usher, 1644 ; and in Greek, by Voss, 1646) gives a final blow
to claims to genuineness by the longer epistles. But while all agree
that the shorter letters — called by Lightfoot the Vossian ^ — are better
than the longer, there remains the question whether the smaller them
selves are genuine. Lardner says of it, "Whatever positiveness some
may have shown on either side, I must own I have found it a very
difficult question." At the same time, critics agreed with him that
it is "probable that they are in the main the genuine epistles of
Ignatius." So stood the controversy when Dr Cureton found among the treas
ures brought from Nitria, and published (in 1845), " The Ancient Syriac
version of the Epistles of St Ignatius to St Polycarp, the Ephesians,
and the Eomans," and argued that those three are all the extant genu
ine works of Ignatius. In this Syriac recension not only is the num
ber of epistles smaller, but each epistle itself is shorter, more rugged,
and more abrupt. The upholders of the " Curetonian Epistles " think
the Greek form an expansion and corruption of the lost Greek originals
of those Syriac letters. Its opponents think the Syriac a capricious
or a devotional abridgment of the Greek.
In 1849 Petermann published an Armenian version of the Ignatian
Epistles, corresponding, so far as the three letters go, with the Syriac,
but containing all the seven Vossian epistles. It contains thirteen in
all — that is to say, six in addition to the Vossian. He argues that this
Armenian version was made from a Syriac version in the fifth century.
If this be true, then both a Greek and a Syriac version of more than
the seven epistles must have existed at a very early date.
Such, and so complicated, is the question of the Ignatian letters. The
latest theory, to which many critics ^ have declared their adherence, is
that the seven letters which we now have are those that were known
and accurately described by Eusebius, that they were translated into
Syriac soon after his time, and that the Curetonian epistles are merely
an extract from them. It is further supposed that they were inter
polated by the pseudo-Ignatius about the period a.d. 360-380, and that
this is the origin of the longer recension.
' Strictly speaking, as stated in the text, Voss had only the Greek of six ; the
seventh (Romans) was published by Ruinart. This epistle, probably because ad
dressed to a distant European church, is not found in the oldest MSS alongside of
the other six, which seem to have been collected in Asia at an early date. Polycarp
tells the Philippians, c. 13, that he has collected and sends all the Ignatian letters
he can find, and that they are full of faith and patience and all Christian edification.
The Eoman one was not at hand— there was not time for it to have come back ; and
we owe its preservation to its being imbedded in a martyrology. _ _
2 Zahn claims that he has won for his views the approval of Hilgenfeld, Lipsius,
Overbeck, Delitzsoh, and others. See Pat. Apost. op. (Gebhardt, Harnack, and
Zahn), vol. ii. p.. 6. He has certainly found a powerful ally in Lightfoot.

XXVIII INTEODUCTION.
Notwithstanding the apparent agreement of critics in thinking at
least the Curetonian letters genuine (because the quotations of the
second and third centuries are found in them), and the Vossian epistles
not later than the middle of the second century, mainly because of the
writer's absolute silence on the controversies which distracted the
Church at a later date, we venture still to think that all the difficulties
are by no means solved.
The story on which the epistles rested, though not beyond doubt,^ is
probably true. It seems to be a fact that Ignatius professed himself
to be a Christian while Trajan was in Antioch (a.d. 116^), and was
sent to Eome to the wild beasts. It is probably true -that Ignatius
wrote various letters while upon this journey, — the earliest testimony
(Polycarp, Theophilus, Irenaeus, Origen, Lucian, Eusebius) is quite
enough to establish that fact ; but the point upon which we are not
sure is the survival of those letters to our day in such a form that they
can be used as evidence of anything else. Polycarp in his epistle
refers to the letters ; Irenseus and Origen quote them explicitly ; but
when we use any passage, we are in doubt whether it has not been
manipulated. It is in the matter of quotation from Scripture that the
longer forms differ most from each other. The Curetonian text con
tains no quotation from the Old Testament, and very few fi-om the New.
The Vossian contains a number of quotations, the longer Greek form
very many. Which is the genuine form of these letters ? I cannot
'The authorities before Eusebius for the Ignatian authorship of the letters are
four in number. Polycarp (Phil. c. 13, 9, i. 1) refers to Ignatins's letter to the
Philippians. Irenaeus (B. V. 28, 8) refers to Ign. ad Rom. c. 4, 2, in this way : as
elire, ns rav Tifterepav SiA t^v -Trphs &ehv fiaprvpiav KaraKpiBels -Trphs Bripia. Origen (Pro
log, to Canticles) cites Ign. ad Rom. c. 7, 2 : Denique memini aliquem sanctorum
dixisse, Ignatium nomine, de Christo. And in his sixth Hom. in Luc. he says :
KoAws iv fii^ rav fidprvp6s rtvos iiriffroXav yeypairrai — rhv 'lyvdriov Keya, rhv fierh
rhv ixaKdpiov Hirpov rris ' Avr toxeias devrepov inriffKotrov rhv iv tQ StuyiMtf iv '-Pci^-rj
B-npiois fiax-no-d/ievov. When Eusebius takes up the subject, he (H. E. III. 36) refers
to the testimonies of Polycarp and Irenseus. He refers to the tradition which speaks
of Ignatius as sent from Syria to Eome, to be the prey of -wild beasts, with his \6yos
S' Ix^' — ^ phrase that seems, in his usage, to distinguish tradition from clearly his
torical authority. In his Chronicle (after II. 23 Abr.), Eusebius mentions Ignatius
as martyr and second bishop of Antioch ; and again he seems to speak of him as
second bishop of Antioch. But the lists of bishops are confused ; and Eusebius seems,
in his Chronicle, to depend on Julius Africanus (a.d. 222), who makes Euodius the
first bishop of Antioch, and Ignatius the second, without counting Peter. Origen's
notice, therefore, contradicts this ; and Polycarp and Irenseus are too vague to be
much depended upon for the details of the Ignatian story. Founding on the above
facts, Harnack (Die Zeit des Ignatius, 1878) concludes that the tradition of Ignatius
suffering martyrdom under Trajan is a bare possibility, without certaintj', without
even special probability (p. 71). The ingenious argument of Harnack, however, fails to
account for the references in Polycarp, Irenaeus, and Origen. They were founded on
some fuller narratives — not on mere chronicles ; and though we have not the details
known to them, we must be prepared to allow for their existence.
" Wieseler (Chrtstenverfolgungen der Casaren, s. 126) still maintains that A.n.
107 is the date. But he founds on Eus. Chron., which Eusebius himself does not
adhere to.

IGNATIUS. XXIX
help thinking that all of them suggest suspicions ; that even in the
shortest form they contain anachronisms and high prelatical views
foreign to the spirit of the New Testament, and characteristic of a sys
tem of Church government which there had not been time to develop
since the last Epistles of St Paul were written. We read in Polycarp
of presbyters and deacons only ; Clement speaks of bishops or overseers
and deacons : but we are in another atmosphere when we read those
" Letters of Ignatius," who was not later than they. Take, for example,
the letter to Polycarp, as it is even in the Syriac version. It seems
to me so unnatural a letter to be addressed to the great saint and bishop
of Smyrna, that it would need very cogent external evidence for its gen
uineness before being accepted. Speaking of a man who can remain
unmarried, he says (c. 5) : " If he boasts, he is undone ; if he become
known apart from the bishop,^ he has destroyed himself." After a few
more words, he says, addressing not the bishop but the Church (c. 6) :
" Look ye to the bishop, that God also may look upon you. May I be
instead of the souls of those who are subject to the bishops, presbyters,
deacons ; and may it be granted to me to have my lot with them in God."
The whole tone of this letter is unlike Paul's in addressing his young
friends Timothy and Titus ; and it seems inconceivable that Ignatius
could have spoken so much de haut en bas in addressing Polycarp.
The Epistle to the Ephesians is full of similar expressions : they are to
" receive the bishop as Him that sent him " (c. 6). ^ The Epistle to
the Eomans is not in the same tone.
It is possible that one's opinions on the general subject of the origin
of Episcopacy may warp his critical judgment. I can only say that I
have striven to divest myself of prejudice, and that after I have made
every effort at being dispassionate, those letters still seem to me to
have been either written or interpolated by one who was eager to
extend an episcopal system already in existence, and that they there
fore represent a much later date than the first or second decade of the
second century.^ The strongest argument on the other side is, that
the tremulous eagerness of the writer to confirm the authority of the
bishop indicates consciousness that he was far ahead of his readers in
his hierarchical views. But this does not prevail to establish an early
date, and is quite consistent with a late one.
' In the Vossian form it is ; " If he be better known than the bishop, he is ruined "
 " iav yvaa-By irXeov rov iTn(TK6Trov, %(pBaprai.
^ In Smyrn' c. 8, is the first use of the phrase it KaBoXiK'h iKKKvcria, which is said
to be " wherever Christ Jesus is." See Eus. H. E. IV. 7 ; Martyr. Pol. 8, &c.
3 See Dressel's arguments (Proleg., p. xxvii), which remain in force, after all that
Zahn (in his Ignatius von Antiochien, 1873 ; and in Gebhardt aud Harnack's Pat.
Ap.) and Lightfoot (in the Cont. Rev., 1875) have said.

xxx

INTEODUCTION.

Epistle to the Ephesians.

Qtwtations.
C. 8, 2. 1 Cor. ii. 14— The fleshly can
not do spiritual things. (Per
haps an echo.)
10, 1. 1 Tim. ii. 1 — Pray without
ceasing. See also Ign. ad
Polyc. u. 1. 3.
11, 1. Mat. iii. 7 — The wrath to
come; 1 John ii. 18 — "Last
times."
14, 2. Mat. xii. 83— The tree known
by its fruit.
15, 3. Apocalypse, xxi. 3— God in the
midst of us. See also 2 Cor.
vi. 16 — (We are God's tem
ples).
16, 1. 1 Cor. vi. 9— Shall not inherit
the kingdom of God.
17, 1. Mat. xxvi. 7 — Spikenard on
the Lord's head.
18, 1. 1 Cor. i. 20 — The cross a stum
bling-block, &c. ; Where is
the wise man, &c.
18, 2. Rom. i. 3, 4 — Christ's descent
from David, &c.

Echoes.
C. 1. Eph. V. 2— Offering, &c. salu
tation ; Rom. XV. 29; Eph.
iv. 13. (Pleroma, ir\-fipaftia.)
2. Col. i. 7— Refresh ; 2 Tim. i. 16 ;
1 Cor. i. 10 — unity of mind.
4, 2. 1 Cor. vi. 15 ; Eph. v. 30 —
Members of Christ.
5. Mat. x-viii. 16; Acts iii. 20.
7, 2. John xvii. 3 — Christ the true
life. (See also c. 11, 1.)
Eph. iv. 3 — oue calling, &c.
8, 1. 1 Cor. iv. 13 — OfFscouring. See
also c. i. 1.
9. Eph. ii. 22— Stones of the tem
ple ; 1 Pet. ii. 8.
14, 1. Rev. i. 8 and xxi. 6 ; 2 Pet.
i. 5, 7 — ' ' Faith and love the
beginning and the end of
life — Faith the beginning,
love the end."
15, 3. Heb. iv. 13 — All things known
to God.
19, 2. Mat. ii. 1— The star.
20, 1. 1 Tim. i. 5, &c.— The steward
ship.
21, 2. 1 Tim. i. 1— Christ our hope.
16. Heb. X. 28 — How much more ?
Mark ix. 43.

Epistle to the Magnesians.

Quotations.
C. 5, 1. Acts i. 25 — " His own place."
8, 2. John viii. 29 — Who pleased in
all things Him that sent
Him.
10, 2. Put away the old leaven, "tirep-
BeaBe oZv r^v kuk^v C^fi7)v (in
1 Cor. V. 7 — iKKaBdpare r^v
ira\ai^v ^vfiriv, &c.)

Echoes.
C. 6, 1. John i. 2 — Christ with the
Father. See also 1 Peter,
&c.
6, 2. Titus ii. 7— Type.
7, 1. Johu V. 19, &c.— Christ "did
nothing without the Father."
7, 2. John xvi. 28 — Christ proceed
ing from the Father.
8, 1. 1 Tim. i. 4 ; Gal. v. 4— Juda
ism ; Titus i. 14 ; iii. 9 ; Heb.
xiii. 9— divergence into use
less controversies.
9, 1. Col. ii. 16, 17 — Not sabbatis-
ing, but keeping the Lord's
day.
14, 1. Rom. XV. 14— "Ye are full of
goodness."

IGNATIUS.

xxxi

Epistle to the Trallians.

C. 11, 1.

Quotatioris.
Mat. XV. 13— A plant of the
Father. See also Philadel-
phiaus, c. 3, 1.

Echoes.
C. 1, 3. 1 Pet. V. 5 — Subject to one an
other.
3, 8. 2 Cor. xii. 6—1 spare.
8, 2. 1 Tim. V. 14— "Giving no oc
casion to the Gentiles."
12, 3. 1 Cor. ix. 27— Lest 1 be unap
proved, cast-away.
8. Kard<rr-i)p,a, Titus ii. 8.

Epistle to the Romans.

C. 5, 1.
7,2.7, 1.
9,2.

Quotations.
1 Cor. iv. 4 — Not thereby jus
tified.
John iv. 14 ; vii. 38 — Living
water within.
Prince of this world. See John
xii. 31 ; xiv. 30 ; xvi. 11.
1 Cor. vii. 25 ; xv. 8.

Echoes.
C. 2, 2. Phil. ii. 17 ; 2 Tim. iv. 6 —
Libation.
4, 3. 1 Cor. vii. 22 ; ix. 1— The ser
vant Christ's freedman.
5, 1. 1 Cor. XV. 32— Fight with wild
beasts.
6, 1. Mat. xvi. 26 — Better to die to
Christ than to rule over the
ends of the earth.
6. Phil. i. 21— Christ the gain.

Epistle to the Philadelphians.

Quotations.
2, 1. Eph. V. 8 ; John xii. 26 ; 1
Thess. V. 5 — Children of the
light.
3, 3. 1 Cor. vi. 9— Inherit the king
dom of God.
7, 1. John iii. 8 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 25 —
The hidden work of the Spirit.
7, 2. Phil. ii. 3 — Nothing through
strife.
8, 2. The Gospel the standard. See
Phil. c. 2, 3.
9, 1. John X. 7— Christ the door of
the Father.

1,1,
5, 1,

11.

Echoes.
Gal. i. 1 — Not of men, &c.
Prophets, Gospel Apostles.
Also s. 2 — The Gospel of our
common hope.
Gal. ii. 7 — Christ intrusted
with the Holy of Holies.
Mat. xxiii. 27— Tombs.
Rom. iv. 7 — Receive one an
other.

Epistle to the Smten.«:ans.

C. 1, 1. See also Ign. ad Eph. c. 18,
20 ; Rom. i. 4— Christ of the
seed of David according to
the flesh.
Mat. iii. 15 — Baptised of John
that all righteousness might
be fulfilled.
6, 1. Mat. xix. 12. See Trail, c. 11, 2.

Echoes.
C. 4, 1. John xvii. 3, &c. — Christ the
true light.
13, 1. 1 Tim. V ; iii. 11 — Virgins
called widows.
3. Acts X. 41.
10. 3 John, VV. 6, 8 — Receiving be
lievers.

XXXII INTEODUCTION.
Epistle to Polycarp.
Quotations. Echoes.
C. 1. 1 Thess. V. 17 — Pray, &c. See C. 4. 1 Tim. v. 3 ; vi. 1 ; James ii.
Eph. 2 ; 1 Pet. ii. 16.
1, 3. Mat. viii. 17 — Ignatius here 5. Eph. v. 25 — Husbands love
quotes Isaiah through St Mat- wives.
thew. 6, 2. Eph. -vi. 11 — Armour of God ;
2, 2. Mat. X. 16. 1 Thess. v. 8.
6. 2 Tim. ii. 4— Please Him.
7, 1. Eph.
Note. — In the Martyr. Ign. Colb., ifit be genuine, are one or two valuable refer
ences. (Imbedded in this we find Ign. ad Rom.)
C. 2. Els yap ea-nv Behs, & Troi^aas rhv ovpavhv Kal r^v y^v Kal t^v BdXatrffav KoL
irdvra rh iv outoTs, Kal els Ij Xs, & vihs avrov d /iovoyeviis — Rom. ix. 5 ;
1 John iv. 9.
2. Teypajrrai yhp- 'EvoiK-licra iv avro7s Kal i/iireptirar'lia-a — 2 Cor. -vi. 16.
EPISCOPACY. Ephesians.
C. 2, 2. Obedience to the bishop and presbytery a means of complete sanctification.
3, 2. Territorial bishopries.
5, 2. Great power of bishops' prayers.
5, 3. Joined to the bishop, as the Church is to Jesus Christ, aud as He is to
the Father. To be subject to the bishop, that they may be subject to
God.
6, 1. Look to the bishop as to the Lord Himself.
To THE Magnesians.
C. 4, 6. The bishop presiding in the place of God, and the presbyters in the
place of the Sanhedrim of the apostles and the deacons.
13, 2. Obey the bishops and others as Christ His father according to the flesh,
and the apostles obeyed Christ and the Father and the Spirit, that
the unity may be both in the flesh and in the Spirit.
Trallians.
C. 2, 2. Do nothing without the bishop; be obedient also to the presbyterj', as
to the apostles of Jesus Christ. See also o. 3, 1.
7. He that does anything apart from the bishop, and the presbytery and
the deacon, this man is not pure in his conscience. See whole chapter,
and also c. 12.
C. 8, 1. Follow the bishop as Christ followed the Father, &c.
8, 2. Wherever the bishop appear, there let the multitude be ; likeas wherever
Jesus Christ may be, there is the Catholic Church. It is uot lawful
without the bishop either to baptise or to celebrate the love- feast • but
whatever he may resolve, that also is well pleasing to God, that what
ever is done may be secure and valid.

IGNATIUS.

XXXIII

Ignatius's Quotations from the Old Testament.

Verbatim,.
Magnesians, c. 12 j Prov.
xviii. 17.

amg.
Eph. c. 5; Prov. iii. 34
— &ehs K^pios.
Eph. c. 15, 1 ; Ps. xxxiii.
9.
Magnesians, c. 13, 1 ; Ps.
i. 8.
Smyi'naeans, c. 1, 2 ; Is.
V. 26.

Variant.
Trallians, c. 8, 2 ; Is. lii.
5. (See Rom. ii. 24 for
almost exact quotation.
Ignatius changes the
statement by prefixing
oval. )

v.— POLYCAEP.
An inquiry into the testimony of Polycarp need not range over a wide
field. Many works have been ascribed to him, but there is not now
any controversy regarding any of them save his letter to the Philip
pians. There is also a venerable monument of antiquity of which
Eusebius has embodied a large portion in his narrative, and which is
likewise found by itself.under the title of the ' Martyrdom of Polycarp.'
There can be no doubt of its great age, and of its containing some
touching details of the aged martyr's fidelity to his faith. But it is
burdened with some miracles useless save for purposes of display ; its
anxiety about the date indicates a recent martyrologist ; and it pro
fesses to relate scenes in the Eoman theatre which a Christian can
with difficulty be supposed to have seen.^ If we take it as it stands,
it'must be regarded as the compilation of some pious and credulous
chronicler of an age later than the Martyr. But recent investigation
tends to separate the original document from the accretions,^ and to
give fair grounds for accepting it as of the age of Polycarp.
But the Epistle which comes to us as Polycarp's own is of more im
portance. Who was Polycarp ? The testimony of the early Christian
Church to his special position is clear, copious, and authentic. Irenseus,
in a touching letter to a friend of his own youth, shows how high was
Polycarp's social position, and how honoured he was because of his
' See an exhaustive and convincing discussion in Donaldson's Apostolical Fathers
(1874), p. 198, &o.
^ See Zahn, Pat. Apost., Proleg., p. xlix, &c. The famous dove {irepta-Tepd) flying
from the wound in Polycarp's body is supposed by Wordsworth to have been a clerical
error for vepl ffripaKa, descriptive of the blood flowing. Wieseler, however, throws
doubt on the possibility of regarding (rripa^ as the handle of a it<t>os, and supposes
the words irepiarepii. Kai to be an interpolation. Eusebius has omitted them.

XXXIV INTRODUCTION.
having in his earlier days heard the truth from John and others who
had seen the Lord, and how entirely his reminiscences harmonised
with the written records ^ of the Lord's miracles and teaching.^
From Irenseus (B. III. 3), also, we have a formal and deliberate
testimony to the position of his old teacher, which we mugt quote in
full.3 "Aud Polycarp, who was not only instructed by Apostles, and had intercourse
with many who had seen Christ, but was also appointed for Asia by Apostles in the
church that is in Smyrna, an overseer, whom also we have seen in the beginning of
our life, for he reraained a long time, and at an exceedingly old age, having borne
his -testimony gloriously and most notably, departgd this life, always taught these
things, which also he learned from the Apostles, which also he gave to the Church,
and which alone are true. To these doctrines testimony is also borne by all the
churches throughout Asia, and by those who have been up till this time the successors
of Polycarp, who was a much more trustworthy and secure witness of the truth than
Valentinus and Marcion and the rest, who held wicked opinions. He [Polycarp]
also sojourned at Rome in the time of Anicetus, converted many from the previously
mentioned heretics to the Church of God, having proclaimed that he had received
from the Apostles this as the one and only truth which he had delivered to thc
Church. And there are those who heard him say that John, the disciple of the
Lord, having gone to bathe in Ephesus, on seeing Cerinthus inside, leaped from the
bathing establishment without bathing, and exclaimed, ' Let us flee, lest the baths
fall in, since Cerinthus, the enemy of truth, is within.' And Polycarp himself, when
Marcion one time met him and said, ' Do you recognise us ? ' answered, ' 1 recognise
the firstborn of Satan.' Such was the caution which the Apostles and their dis
ciples took not to have even verbal communication with those who perverted the
truth : as Paul also said, ' A heretical man avoid after a first and second admonition,
knowing that such au one has been turned away, and sins, being self-condemned."
In still another passage (Eus. H. E. V. 24), Iren^us gives some
further particulars of Polycarp's sojourn at Eome in the time of Ani
cetus, — showing that he was recognised as a representative of the
followers of the Apostle John. The passage itself falls to be considered
in another connection as bearing on what has become known as the
" Paschal Controversy " (see text, p. 192). But for our present purposes
it is enough to use this passage of Irenffius, and the references in Euse
bius, as attesting that Polycarp was the disciple of the Apostle John.
So much for the personality of the author. When did he live and
die ? As a pupil of John and other eye-witnesses, he must have been
old enough before the end of the first century to appreciate the teach
ings of the Apostles ;* and as he died at the stake about the middle of
* " 'ATT^yeAAe irdvra (rti^tpava tois ypa(pa7s.^'
" Irenaeus's letter to Florinus : see Eus. H. E.^V. 20.
3 The translation is Dr Donaldson's, — ApostoUcal Fathers, p. 192.
* If we accept the tradition that just before his death he declared he had served
Christ eighty and six years, and admit (see below) that he was killed in a.d. 155 the
date of his birth is a.d. 69, If John lived till the time of Trajan, Polycai p was about
thirty years old when the aged Apostle died.

POLYCAEP. xxxv
the second century,'- he is the most important living link between the
writers whose works are the foundation of Christianity, and those
others, such as Irenseus, whose works are the beginning of undoubted
Christian treatises on the canonical Scriptures. There is some doubt
as to the exact date of his death, contending critics upholding various
years between a.d. 140 and 168. The date most recently maintained is
A.D. 155 ; but, as our footnote shows, its acceptance leaves us at issue
with some ancient authorities. There is not much diflSculty in ascribing
to the Epistle a date some time near the middle of the second century.
In regard to the letter itself. Its importance has led to its being
very minutely scrutinised. Most of it exists in Greek ; but part is
only in an old Latin version, and where we have both they do not
always correspond. This at the very outset awakens some suspi
cion, and in this fact the most important objections to the letter have
their root. There is one objection founded on an alleged contradiction.
In chap. 9 the writer speaks of the patience which the Philippians
have seen before their eyes " in the blessed Ignatius, and Zosimus, and
Eufus, and others," ^ those martyrs being evidently dead. But in chap.
13 he asks (according to the Latin) for some tidings of Ignatius and
those who are with him — Ignatius being thus referred to as still alive.^
1 Contending critics have had new ground opened for them in the researches of M.
Waddington. In his "Memoire sur la Chronologie de la vie du rheteur jElius
Aristide" (Mem. of the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, Jan. 27, year
1867), he set himself to establish that the date of Polycarp's martyrdom was February
155. It is impossible to exaggerate the respect with which every one must regard the
careful and exhaustive summary of valuable details— from literature, coins, and im
perial edicts — which is presented iu this memoir. In his 'Pastes des Provinces
Asiatiques' (1872), M. Waddington presents fuller details most methodically ar
ranged (see on Quadratus, p. 220). The result is as already stated, and the majority
of critics accept it. The strong point of a general kind is that on the ordinary
date, A.D. 166, it is not possible to give Polycarp a mature age while the Apostle
John lived. " Eighty and six years have 1 served Christ," were Polycarp's words ;
and whether we begin to reckon from his birth or his baptism, we have him a very
young man in the year A.D. 100, about which time John died. Another point is that
Quadratus governed Asia a.d. 154, 155 ; and that in his time (if we are to take the
letter of the church of Smyrna as an authority) Polycarp suffered._ The greater
number of scholars have followed Waddington very closely (Lipsius, Echhardt,
and Hilgenfeld differing only by a year, and saying a.d. 156), and thus discard-
Eusebius, Jerome, and the Paschal Chronicle, which agree in fixing the martyrdom
after the accession of M. Aurelius (a.d. 161), — Eusebius making the date a.d. 166,
and Jerome a.d. 167. The day of the week and the day of the month iu the Julian
year coincided every eleven years (Wieseler), and many of the marks of time would
suit either A.D. 155 or a.d. 166. Wieseler (Die Christenverfolgungen der Casaren)
defends the date of Eusebius. He founds upon the common consent of antiquity that
Polycarp sufi'ered in the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and on the visit of Polycarp to
Rome in the episcopate of Anicetus, which began a.d. 157 or 158. Keim (Aus dem
Urchristenthum) protests against blindly following Waddington, and examines with
characteristic care and force the letter of the church of Smyrna. Lightfoot in Cont.
Rev., vol. xxv. p. 838, follows Waddington. _ ^
2 " Ehere (cot' o<p6a\iiohs, ov p-ivov iv rots fianaplois 'lyvaTlip Kal Zaa-lp.tji ko! 'Vov^<f,
aWb. Kal iv &Wois tois i^ v/^av " (or Vfiav), C. 9. _ ^^
3 "Etde ipso Igiiatio, etde his, qui cum eosunt, quod certius agnoveritis, si.gmf,cate.

xxxvi INTRODUCTION.
This sentence closes the chapter in the Latin, — the Greek, which
is preserved in Eus. H. E. III. 36, stopping short without it. De
fenders of the genuineness of the letter, as a whole, admit that c. 13 is
not genuine, but an interpolation, — and indeed it is very like one ; or
say that the Greek only is genuine, this Latin addition being spurious ;
or say thatthe Latin is a mistranslation, — that the Greek was probably
the indefinite phrase rrepl tGv per' avrov, and that the Latin qui cum eo
sunt gives erroneously present tifne.^ At all events the circumstances
do not warrant us in casting away the Epistle as a whole. Another
objection is founded on the apparent indications of date as inconsistent
with the authorship of Polycarp. Thus " Pray for kings " {Orate pro
regibus) is supposed to indicate a date in the time of the joint rule of
Marcus Antoninus and Verus ; but, as a matter of fact, Justin Martyr
uses the word /?ao-iXets in reference to Antoninus Pius and M. Aurelius.
Besides, the injunction is probably general, as in 1 Pet. ii. 17 ; it
certainly reproduces the exhortation of 1 Tim. ii. 2, -n-apaKaXS) . . .
TToielcrdai, Se^oteis . . . vrrep PaariXetm/ Kal rrdvTiov tSiv ev vrrepoxy ovTosv.
Again, the references to heresies are said to aim so clearly at Doketes,
and especially at Marcionites, as to be too late for Polycarp ; but this
cannot be established.^ It has been supposed that by thus finding
indications of a late date it would be possible to discredit the Epistle ;
but its genuineness is too well established to be overturned by such
arguments. As far as any literary production can be regarded as of
assured antiquity, this can ; and although there may be some uncer
tainty as to the very year of its origin, its being written by Polycarp
is quite certain. And if it really be Polycarp's, the particular date of
writing is not of much moment. In any case, it will contain the testi
mony of John's disciple to the common creed of the Christian Church
from the beginning.
We are thus led to examine the passages in which Polycarp comes
into contact with the New Testament. But when we adduce particular
passages, we must not forget that not in such passages only, but in
its whole tone and texture, and in the spirit which it breathes, does
this Epistle remind us of the New Testament.
If we could depend upon the Latin version of c. 12 (the Greek
' In the Greek are nine chapters — in the Latin are fourteen ; but the first chapter
is (except one sentence) preserved in the Greek of Eusebius. Lightfoot has shown
that the Latin version supplies in all such cases the substantive Latin verb, and, at
least in one case, uses sunt in reference to persons dead, — see Cont. Rev., vol. xxv.
p. 844. Compare Zahn's notes in Geb. and Har., Pat. Ap. in loc, and Zahn's Ignatius,
p. 290. The difficulty in each case, however, is whether to give present or past time
to the substantive participle : oi /ler' avrov, with Svres supplied, would not of itself
fix the time, the participle being indefinite.
- Irenffius (B. III. 3, 4) tells us that Polycarp called Marcion the firstborn of Satan,
— irpariroKos toO iarava; and some have argued that the use of the same words in
reference to the denial that "Jesus Christ came in the flesh " is the doing of a forger
using the phrase as a catchword to make the Epistle appear to be Polycarp's. But
there is nothing distinctive of Marcion in the heresy opposed in this Epistle.

POLYCAEP. XXXVII
unfortunately fails us), we should have two quotations, — one from Ps.
iv. 4 and the other from Eph. iv. 26 joined together, — as being both
from the Scriptures, which are called in one clause Sacra literce, and
m another hee Scripturce.^
The principal passage is Ep. to Phil. c. 2, 3 (see p. 112 of our
text). The peculiarity of the passage is, that while it resembles both
Matthew and Luke, and indeed seems to be made up of them both, it
also resembles Clement, and more especially contains that clause iXeelre
Iva iXerjOip-e in Clement, which is not found in the same form in the Gos
pels.^ The favourite idea of some, that a lost Gospel is quoted, would
really be acceptable here, were it not that Clement and Polycarp differ
from each other, as well as from the canonical Gospels. Although they
contain that one striking clause in common, their own clauses are in such
different order that we cannot regard them as quoting from the same lost
source. * It seems most natural to believe that th ey quoted from memory,
and that Christian tradition had preserved that clause in this form,
or added it to the injunctions embodied in our written records of the
Sermon on the Mount.* We have a suggestively similar use by Polycarp
of 1 Pet. ii. 20, &o. (see passage in our text, p. 305, and note there).
It may further be noticed, that although the writer usually weaves the
words or thoughts of the New Testament into his sentences, there are
two breaks, and two express quotations or references. He cites the
words of Jesus with special solemnity : thus in c. 2 his words are,
"As the Lord said teaching;" and in c. 7, "As the Lord said." In
this he resembles Clement ; and the practice is what we might expect
at their early date. These we may call breaks in his writing ; the
following are quotations or references : " Do ye not know that the
saints shaU judge the world, as Paul teaches ? " (1 Cor. vi. 2) ; and again :
" In these Scriptures it is said, ' Be ye angry and sin not ; let not the
sun go down upon your wrath.' "¦ — Eph. iv. 26 and Ps. iv. 4.
There can be no doubt that Polycarp used freely and frequently the
First Epistle of Peter and the Epistles of Paul ; but it is needless to dwell
upon his citations. The reference to the First Epistle of John is so
important in its bearing on the date of the Fourth Gospel, that we
may refer to it here. ' We have a strong statement that he who doth
not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is Antichrist (c. 7),
and no one can deny that this is a fair condensation of the words of
John (1 John iv. 3). It moreover contains John's familiar words : dvri-
' The passage is very obscure, and apparently cormpt. See text under Ephesians,
and note, p. 239. Also p. 112.
' See on the absence of this clause, following words from some MS authorities,
Dressel's note, p. 399.
' Cf. Sanday, ' Gospels in the Second Century,' p. 85.
' The fact that though the clauses in Polycarp are not in the same order as in
Clement, they are in the same form (comp. extracts, pp. 105, 112), is of some signifi
cance ; the question is to what the significance amounts. The student will find it
interesting to compare the passages quoted in the paragraph.

XXXVUI INTEODUCTION.
Xpicrros, £1' o-apKL iXrjXvOevai, eK rov Sia^oXov. There being little doubt
that the First Epistle is by the same author as the Gospel, this may
be regarded as evidence for the " Gospel of John." It may be that
there was " a formula in use in the early Church against various heretics,"
though no one knows about it ; but the words of Polycarp, while
quite consistent with the theory that the disciple was freely using his
Master's thoughts and expressions, are not so consistent with the for
mal use of a "formula." Besides, the constant fleeing to some un
known work — an apocryphal Gospel, or a formula — for refuge from the
pressure of obvious arguments in favour of the theory of quotation
from our well-known canonical writings, is in itself uncritical.
Two remarkable allusions to St Paul are found, c. 3 : —
" These things, brethren, I write unto you concerning righteousness, — not because
I take anything upon myself, but because you have invited me to do so. For neither
I nor any such other one can come up to the wisdom of the blessed and glorified Paul.
He, when ainong you, accurately and steadfastly taught the word of truth in the
presence of those who were then alive. And when absent from you, he wrote you a
letter, which, if you carefully study, you will find to be the means of building you
up in that faith which has been given you, and which, being followed by hope, and
preceded by love towards God and Christ, and our neighbours, is the mother of us
all. For if any one be inwardly possessed of those graces, he hath fulfilled the com
mand of righteousness, since he that hath love is far from all sin."
And again, c. 1 1 : —
"Do we uot know that the saints shall judge the world, as Paul teaches. But I
have neither seen nor heard of any such thing among you, in the midst of whom the
blessed Paul laboured, and who are commended in the beginning of his Epistle.
For he boasts of you in all those churches which aloue knew the Lord ; but we [of
Smyrna] had not yet known Him. " '
We could not ask stronger testimony, direct or indirect, to our New
Testament than this. Its author — the disciple of John, and the
teacher of Irenseus — was a leading and representative man among the
Christians during his long life, and "in his old age," as Irenseus says,
" had a glorious and splendid martyrdom." To whom, then, does this
Saint testify? Not only to the Epistles of his own Master, but to
St Peter, and to the writings of St Paul. There is no trace of jeal
ousy; and he is one in spirit with all the "three mighty ones." His
whole style closely resembles that of 1 Peter and of the later Epistles
of St Paul ; and it would seem as if the last of our inspired writings
which moulded the faith of his youth, had also moulded his thought
and formed his style.
It may not be out of place, in a book primarily designed for students
of theology, to draw attention to a practical lesson, Polycarp  now
' Probably an aUusion to 2 Thess. i. 4, as well as to Philippians : cf. 1 Thess. i. 8.

POLYCAKP. X.Nxix
old and revered — was asked by the Philippians to write them a letter.
He accordingly exhorts them to Christian duty and faith ; proclaiming
the truth as it is in Jesus, " who"i(as he says in c. 8) "bore our sins
in His own body on the tree," and " for our sakes was raised again from
the dead : " but his words are not so remarkable even for their tender
courtesy and touching humility, as for the fact that all his exhorta
tions are based on the autliority of Holy Scripture. It is not Poly
carp as a man who speaks, but a fellow-sinner and fellow-Christian,
who has no right nor title to address them, save in so far as God gives
him grace to remind them of the revealed Word, which in his own
experience he has found to be true and precious beyond aU price. Those
who are ministers of Christ, especiaUy young ministers, may well take
that old man as tlieir model, and say little on their own authority, but
let their hearers feel that it is God who beseeches them. It is poor
preaching which makes people keep the personality of the preacher
in mind. We are called to be followers of Polycarp, as " he also was
of Christ."

NOTE.
1. Polycarp.
There are quotations in the text under the head of the various books of the New
Testament, showing that Polycarp certainly quotes 1 Peter, 1 John, and several of the
Epistles of Paul (indeed all of them, save perhaps Colossians, 2 Timothy, and Titus,
and certainly Philemon) ; that he most probably had the synoptic Gospels (Matthew in
particular) ; and that his use of the First Epistle of John may be supposed to carry a
recognition of the fourth Gospel The references to James, Jude, and 2 Peter are
doubtful. I find no trace of the Apocalypse.
But in addition to quotations, we must notice what may be called echoes, or simi
larities of tone and thought. The following table (I am by no means sure of its being
exhaustive, or of the apportionment being always coiTcct) may indicate the amount
of quotations and echoes in this remarkable little letter : —
The salutation is — " Polycarp, and the Presbyters who are with him, to the Church
of God sojourning at Corinth, grace unto you and peace."
TrapotKoiffT), compare 1 Peter i. 17, ii. 11.
e\eos Kal elpivT), see 2 Tim. i. 2 ; Titus i. 4 ; 2 John iii. ; and Gal. vi. 16.
This may not be a quotation, yet no oue cau doubt its being an echo of St
Paul's forra in words from Peter and Paul.
Quotations. Echoes.
C. 1. Direct quotation oi Acts ii. 24 ; 1 C. 1. Rom. vii. 4 (use of Kapiroipopea) ;
Peter i. 8 ; Eph. ii. 8, 9. and Col. ii. 7 {pi^a Pefiaia).
2. 1 Pet. i. 13; Ps. ii. 11 ; 1 Pet. i. 2. 1 Cor. xv. 28, or Phil. ii. 10 {4
21, iv. 5, iii. 9. Synoptists iwerdyv ra ttoi/to) ; 1 Thess. v.
(Sermon on Mount). 22 {iTrexd/J-evoi rrda-ns dSiKi'os,
3. Phil. iii. 1, &c. ; 2 Thess. i. 4 (?) ; k.t.A.)
Rora. xiii. 9.

xl

INTEODUCTION.

Quotations.
C. 4. 1 Tim. vi. 7, 10 ; Eph. vi. 11 (2
Cor. vi. 7).
5. Gah vi. 7; 1 Tim. iii. 8; 2 Tim.
ii. 12 ; 1 Pet. ii. 11 ; 1 Cor. vi.
9, 10.
6. Rom. xii. 17 (2 Cor. viii. 21);
Rom. xiv. 10 (2 Cor. v. 10).
7. 1 John iv. 8 ; 1 Pet. iv. 7 ; Mat.
xxvi. 41 (perhaps also vi. 13).
8. 1 Pet. ii. 22, 24, &c. ; 1 John iv.
9.
9. Phil. ii. 16 (Gal. ii. 2); 2 Tim. iv.
10.
10. 1 Pet. ii. 17 (Tobit iv. 10, xii. 9) ;
1 Pet. ii. 12.
11. 1 Cor. vi. 2 ; Phil. i. 5 ; Thess. i.
4, iii. 15.
12. Ps. iv. 4 ; Eph. iv. 26 ; Gal. i. 1 ;
1 Tim. ii. 2 ; Mat. v. 44.

C. 8

6

Echoes.
2 Pet. iii. 15 ; 1 John passim {i
y^p exav ayd-jnjv).
1 Thess. V. 17 {ivTvyxavoia-as oSio-
Ae^tttois); Heb. iv. 12, 13 {Koyta-
fiav oUre ivvoiav, k.t.X.)
Gal. V. 7 (common text hvaKirtre-
<rBai); James iii. 2 (xaXivaya-
yovvres).
Mat. vi. 12, 14 (duty of forgiving
if we pray for forgiveness, d^w^-
coi); Gal. iv. 18 (fijAwTo! irepl rh
KaX6v).
7. Jude iii.
8. Acts V. 41 ; 1 Pet. iv. 14, 16 (suffer
ing on account of Christ's name).
9. 2 Tim. ii. 12 (they who suffered
with Christ are now with Him).
11. 1 Tim. iii. 5 {quomodo alii hoc
pronuntiamt?); Col. iii. 5 (avari-
tia=idololatreia) ; 1 Cor. xii. 26
(the body of Christ).
Mat. V. 48; Col. i. 28; Eph. vi.
18; Phil. iii. 18.

12

2. Maetykdom of Polycarp (p. xxxiii).
0. 1,2. irepie/ievev yltp, Iva wapaSoB^, as Kal 6 'Kvptos, Xva fUfOiral ko! ri/ieh aiToS
yevtifieBa, p.^ fi6vov CKOirovvres rh KaB' covroi'S, dXXa Kal rh
Karb. Tohs TreXas — Phil. ii. 4.
2, 3. Koi Toij T^j KapSlas 6<l>BaXiiois dvePXe-irov rh rripoipeva roTs inrotieivaaiv
&.yaBtL a oUre ods iJKOva-ev, otre otpBaKfihs eJSev, o&re eirX Kap
Slav avBpditov ave$ri, iKelvovs Se iireSelKwro {iri rov Kvpiov, oXirep
priKen &v6paTot, dXX' ijS-ri HyyeXoi ^irav — 1 Cor. ii. 9. {Note. — This
use of the prophetic words does not, like St Paul's, refer to the pre
sent gifts of the Spirit, but to the glories of a future heaven.)
7, 1. Tp jropaffKEup Ttepl Seiitvov Sipav ii,r)XBov Siaypirai Koi iTnrErs perh. rav
ffvvf^Bav avrots ^-irXav, &s i-jrl X-rt(rr^v rpix^^'^^s — Mat. xxvi. 55.
7,. 1. KaKeiBev Se fjSivaro els erepov x^P^ov aireXBe^v a\X' ovk i$ovX-fjBri, eiTrdv
rh BeXrjfjM rov &eov yevetrBa — Acts xxi. 14.
10, 2. 'O Se lioXiKapiros elvev (re fikv Kal x6yov ii^ia(ra- SeSiSdypeBa ykp apxais Kol
i^ovirlais v-Trh rov Beov rerayfievais Tifii)v kot^ t!i ¦irpo(rriKov, ri/v pi] fixd-r-
Tovaav r\p.as, itirove/ieiv — Rom. xiii. 1, 7; 1 Pet. ii. 13.
14, 1. Kipie S Behs, i navroKpdrap, i rov iyairrirov Kal eiiXoyrirad iraiSds arov
'Iriffov XpiiTTo'v trariip — Acts iii. 14, &c.
14, 2. eiiXoya ae Sn ii^laads pe rijs vpepas Kal Spas TduTTjs, ToC XafieTv pepos iv
dpiBp^ rav paprvpav iv r^ ¦rrorripi(p toS Xpio-ToG (rov els avdcrrcuriv
(arts alavlov ^vxvs re Kal (Tdparos iv d<pBap(rl(f -irveiparos aylov iv ofs
irpotrSexBeiiiv iv(iTri6v (Tov (rijpepov iv Bu(rl(f viovi KoX •jrpo(rSeKTri, KaBd)s
TrpoTjroifioffas Kal irpoe^avepuKXas ko! iirX-tipoKras, i di//Eu5^s ko! oKrtQivhs
BeiSs- Mat, XX. 22 ; John v. 29 ; xvii. 3 ; 1 Pet. iii. 18.

PAPIAS. xll

VL— PAPIAS.
It would be a great event in Biblical Criticism if the lost five books of
Papias were found in some library, as it is not impossible they may yet
be. Except their title, and a few scraps in Irenseus and Eusebius, and
in writers long after their time, we really know nothing about the books
of this old chronicler. The title of his treatise was " an Exposition (dr
Expositions) of the Oracles of the Lord " — AoytW KvpiaKuiv i^i^rja-t^ (or
i^riy-qa-ei.'s) ; and it seems to have been a collection of our Lord's most
important sayings and doings, with Papias's own commentary, and
certain additions to corroborate the commentary — these additions being
drawn from what Papias had collected as unwritten reminiscences.^
The importance of the book lies in the fact that Papias, like Polycarp,
was a link between the apostolic age and that of Irenseus. Irenseus^
caUs him "Papias, a man of the olden time, the hearer of John and
companion of Polycarp." As Iren^us himself was a native of Asia
Minor, and seems to have been at one time in Laodicea, it is neither im
possible nor improbable that in his youth he had met the old Bishop of
Hierapolis.* Eusebius, indeed, throws doubt upon the words of Ire
nseus, denying that Papias himself ever claimed to be a hearer and eye
witness of the holy Apostles. But Eusebius, with characteristic hon
esty, enables us to judge for ourselves, and a judgment in accordance
with his is by no means unavoidable. Without here entering minute
ly into the controversy, it is enough to say that the few sentences
which remain to us from Papias descriptive of his purpose may fairly
be taken to mean that he at first learned not a little from the Apostles
themselves,* and that afterwards, during his whole life, he had added
to his personal reminiscences those which he was able to collect from
other companions of the Apostles. His first words are, " I shall cer
tainly not refuse to set down for you, along with my interpretations,
what things I well leamed from the elders, and well recorded [or re-
' Lightfoot, Cont. Rev., vol. xxvi. p. 399. Bishop Lightfoot's discussion of the
subject seems to me so conclusive, that I merely refer to the results as securely
established. « B. V. 33, 4.
' See Geb. and Har., p. 189. The tradition rests mainly on Armenian author
ity, and Jerome uses words which seem to be thus confirmed, — " Befert Iremzus
. . . Papioe auditoris evcfngelistce Joannis discipulus. "
* Compare Eus. Chronic. Irenaeus and others relate that John remained in life
until the times of Trajan : ptff Sv nair-irias 'lepairoXirris ko! noXiKapvos ^fiipvris i-^i-
(TKOTTos dKouo-To! ^7i'«p(fo;'To. (See Geb. and Har. (Zahn), Pat. Ap., p. 187.)

xiii INTEODUCTION.
membered 1], being well assured of the truth concerning them. For
I was in the habit of taking delight (not like the many) in those
having much to say, but in those teaching the things that are true :
nor in those recalling the precepts of strangers, but in those recalling
the things given by the Lord to faith [or, to make Christian verity],
and proceeding from the truth itself [or, from the very Truth, — see John
xiv. 6]. And if anywhere there chanced also to come one who had
been in company with the Elders [see Luke's Preface], I inquired in
to the words of the Elders : what Andrew or what Peter said, or what
Philip, or what Thomas (said), or James : or what John or Matthew or
some other one of the disciples of the Lord (said) : which things [or,
what things] Aiistion and John the Elder say. For I did not account
myself so much indebted to the things which come from books, as to
those which come from the living and abiding voice." (Text, p. 54.)
There can be no reasonable doubt that, from a natural interpretation
of his words, we learn that at the time when Papias wrote, Aristion and
the Presbyter John were living and adding to his stock of reminis
cences. At a later period in his narrative, Eusebius tells us that
Papias had received at least one wonderful narrative from the daugh
ters of Philip the Apostle. There may be some doubt of his exact
date, but there can be none as to his living at the period when our
authorities are fewest, and every word they left unspeakably precious.
Still further, Eusebius tells us that Papias, " who seemed very weak in
the mind," ^ had given a literal and physical interpretation of certain
figurative prophecies spoken by our Lord. The subject of these pro
phecies was the millennium : and Eusebius, who was a keen anti-
millennarian, denounces aU. those (he instances Irenseus) who were so
led away " by respect for the antiquity of the man " as to foUow his
weak-headed expositions. In another passage, however, Eusebius
caUs him a very learned man.^ There is some difficulty at first sight
in believing that Eusebius at one time thus praised and at another
thus disparaged Papias, and hence probably the omission of one of
those expressions in some MS authorities. But it is quite possible to
be a man of lore and yet not much of a thinker, so that Eusebius's
estimate of the two sides of Papias's character may be aUowed to
remain, and is probably true. When, therefore, we find Papias giving
^ 'EpvT\p6vevaa. We have this word used by Papias iu the next sentence with
the meaning " record "or " relate ; " and in the comments of Eusebius which follow,
we have it used in the same way, — " owtcDj' fivripoveiaas." It may be taken in the
same sense here, and may intimate that Papias from an early date took notes of
-what he heard from the Elders. If so, his 80-0 itote iraph rav Trpe(rPvTepav KaXas
in&Bov ko! KaXas ipvrip6vev(ra are words of special importance. They deliberately
claim for his work all the accuracy of which pains and opportunity could make him
capable. Aia$efiaioipevos will convey the same idea of " well-grounded conviction "
in his own mind.
^ "%(l>^SpaydproicrtiiKphsi)VThvvovv . . . (paiverai." — H. E. 111. 39.
' '"Ai'^p TO Trdvra on pdXiffTa Xoyuiraros Kal rrjs ypa(j>rjs elSijpav." — H. E. III. 36.

PAPIAS. xliii
interesting- particulars regarding the Gospels of Matthew and Mark,
the question with which we have mainly to do is not his intellect, but
his honesty. If he knew our Gospels, they must have been in men's
hands in his day : for " weakness of intellect does not enable one to
speak of books as existing which are not in existence." ^
This leads us to a somewhat more special inquiry as to what his
day was. If he were really a disciple of the Apostles, and if he lived
in Asia Minor at the time when John wrote his Gospel, he becomes
a man of great importance in the controversies regarding the fourth
Gospel, as weU as regarding Matthew and Mark. We do not know
when he was born, nor do we know when he died,^ but he must have
met many of the apostolic age ; and we may regard the disciple of
John, the friend of Polycarp, the contemporary of Philip's daughters, the
man who seemed to Irenseus a "man ofthe early times" {dpxaio'i dvqp),
the man who knew both the " elders " and their younger associates, as
having flourished during the first and second quarters of the second
century, and as having lived from about a.d. 70 to about a.d. 150.
AU that we have of Papias's writing will be found in our text. It
is all quite consistent with his character as a well-intentioned caterer
of tradition. It is not consistent with the theory that he was trying
to compile either a supplement to our Gospels in an authoritative sense,
or a substitute in any sense whatever. Nay, we must go further and
add that, so far as those extracts go, they seem conclusively to point
to a man who accepted the authoritative records of Christ's life which
were accepted by the Church. If he speaks of the Gospels, it is to
give some traditions regarding their origin which were likely to be of
interest to future generations. If he speaks of the sayings of our
Lord, it is to give an exposition of them, and to back up his own ex
position by traditional expansion and illustrative anecdote.*
And what, then, does this " man of the olden time " say about our
Gospels? In our text (p. 57) will be found proof that he gives ex
plicit testimonies to the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, to the first
Epistles of John and Peter, and to the Apocalypse of Jolui. The
reference to the Acts of the Apostles is doubtful, but I think it prob
ably is made by Eusebius himself, and not by Papias. After Light
foot's article on " The Silence of Eusebius " * there is no need to
assume that Papias's references were confitaed to those books of the
' Norton, Genuineness of Gospels, vol. i. p. 76.
" The Paschal Chronicle (seventh century) has usually been regarded as fixing his
martyrdom in a.d. 164; but the chronicler or his transcriber has evidently made a
mistake in substituting " Papias " for " Papylus " in copying the narrative of Euse
bius, so that we know nothing of the date of Papias's death. See Lightfoot, as
above, p. 382.
" Perhaps this is generalising rather too much frora the long passage preserved by
Irenaeus. * Cont. Rev., vol. xxv.

xliv INTEODUCTION.
canon. But there is abundant controversy as to the bearing of what
Papias has undoubtedly said.
The main points are (a) that Matthew's Gospel was written in Heb
rew, and (/8) that Mark's Gospel was composed from what Peter said
in the course of preaching ; (7) that the First Epistle of John was an
authority to Papias, and (8) an Epistle of Peter likewise. There is
also a statement by Eusebius that "Papias brings forward another
narrative about a woman accused of many crimes before the Lord.
Which story," adds Eusebius, " the Gospel according to the Hebrews
contains." Without entering on the controversy as to the rendering
of the passages, which wiU speak for themselves, we may say that the
notice of Matthew is far too fragmentary to bear much strain : and yet
it has been used as though it were a rounded treatise. As it stands,
it would naturally lead to an account of the origin of the Greek version
of St Matthew, which terminated the time of confusion, when " every
man" [i.e., every man who — like Papias himself? — did not know Heb
rew very well) "interpreted as he was able" the original Hebrew of
Matthew. As it stands,— and without reference to what may have
followed, — it tells us that at first Matthew wrote in Hebrew, and that
at that date there was some difficulty in many quarters in interpret
ing him, because the language was Hebrew. It does not teU us
that this diflSculty existed at the time when Papias wrote. It does
not tell us that Matthew's Xoyia, or oracles, were only sacred sayings ; —
for the natural meaning of Xo'yta is sacred oracles, whether containing
narrative or speech.^ (See note, p. 57.)
And as to Mark's Gospel, Papias (p. 56) teUs us that Mark -wrote
with precision (axpt/Jios), but not in exact order (ra^Ei), the words and
works of Christ. There has been infinite dispute as to the meaning of
Papias's apologetic reference to the want of exact order (to^is . . .
a-vvToiis) in Mark ; but surely we might accept it as a fact that no one
definite principle of arrangement, whether from regard to time or to
subject, has yet been discovered for any one of our Gospels.^ The
want of this is quite consistent with each Gospel having a beginning
and end determined by chronology. So far as Papias is concerned, we
are left to the conclusion of the Muratorian Chronicler that, notwith
standing various differences, the essentials of the Christian faith are,
under the direction of one supreme Spirit, taught in all the several
books of our Gospels.* It is to be noted, also, that when we read of
' See Lightfoot, as above, p. 400.
" The arguments {e.g., Sanday's) to show that Mark's Gospel is probably nearer to
the normal oi'der than any other, seem to be beside the point. What Papias wants
to say is, that Mark does not profess to have the one only true order ; so that dis
putes on that head (such as seem to have been going on) are unnecessary.
' See Muratorian Fragment. It is there said that the differences are in the prin
cipia, which we may perhaps take to mean the heads of contents ; and this may re
fer to the subject or to the arrangement of those heads.

PAPIAS. xlv
Papias adducing testimonies from the First Epistle of John, we have
every reason to believe that he used the Fourth Gospel as John's, for
the common authorship of the Gospel and Epistle is too obvious to be
seriously disputed. NOTE.
The tradition that the Apostle John Uved in Ephesus.
New interest has attached to the fragments of Papias since Keim's publication of
his bold theory,^ in which Papias plays a prominent part. Although it bears chiefly
on the authorship of the fourth Gospel, and ou some passages of Irenseus iu connec
tion therewith, it nevertheless has its origin in Papias, and may therefore be fitly
considered at this stage. Keim admits, nay proves, the early date of the composi
tion of the fourth Gospel, and places it in Trajan's time, between a.d. 110 and 117.
As Irenaeus expressly says (Book II. 22, 5) that John lived till Trajan's time — i.e.,
A.D. 98-117 — we might suppose that the authorship of the fourth Gospel was at last
settled by the critics. But Keim, while holding by the date, denies that the son of
Zebedee is the Evangelist, and wishes to make out that another John, the Presbyter
John, of whose very existence not a few able writers are doubtful, is the veritable
hero of Church History in Asia Minor, and the true winner of the fame which has
been allowed to gather round the name of the son of Zebedee. He charges the mis
take originally upon Irenaeus, from whom he says all others copied ; and in denying
that Papias knew John the Apostle, he also denies that Polycarp did. His position,
shortly stated, is a denial that the Apostle John was ever in Ephesus. He dwells
upon the absence of all allusion to John in Asia Minor by Ignatius and Polycarp in
their genuine writings, and theu comes to deal with the well-known statements of
Papias, as contained in Eus. H. E. III. 39. He makes a great deal of Papias hav
ing had no intercourse with the Apostle John, or with any other Apostle ; and asks
how, that being so, it is possible to believe that Polycarp, his neighbour and friend,
was so intimate with the son of Zebedee as tradition has made him out to be. The
true solution, according to Keim, is, that the teacher of Papias and of Polycarp, the
author of Papias's chiliastic hallucinations, and the hero of the traditions of Asia
Minor, was not the son of Zebedee, but another John,— John the Presbyter.
We may sum up Keim's position thus : —
1. Papias did not know any Apostle : this Keim takes from Eusebius.
2. Papias had once known Aristion and John the Presbyter.
3. Papias had learnt from them what the Apostles said (Keim says Papias does
not say this ; but Keim infers it from other statements of Eusebius).
4. When Eusebius does mention John the Apostle, he puts him so low in the list
of Apostles as to show that John had no more to do with Asia Minor than Matthew
had. 5. John the Presbyter was the author of the chiliastic fantasies in the minds of
Papias, Irenaeus, and others.
To these it must be replied : —
1. That Keim is going too far in denying Papias's personal acquaintance with an
Apostle. He may have known some of them, although his thirst for knowledge was
1 The references are to Keim's Jesus v. Nazara (1867), vol. i. p. 1 43 &c. English
transl., vol. i. p. 207 (see p. vi. note 2). There is a full discussion in Max Krenkel s
' Der Apostel Johannes,' 1872.

xlvi INTEODUCTION.
so great, that he had always tried to learn from everybody who knew them what
they had said about the Lord. It is quite possible to have known great men, and
yet to be indebted to others for many reminiscences of them. And we have seen
some reason to believe that this was so with Papias.
2. In point of fact, he does not say in the passage mainly founded on that he had
even seen Aristion and John the Presbyter.
8. He had learnt from everybody what the Apostles said ; and he seems to quote
Aristion and John the Presbyter as confirming the trustworthiness of his memo
randa. 4. The low place of John in the list either means nothing or too much for Keim's
purpose ; for if the list were taken for an order of merit, it would contradict the'
teaching of the New Testament, that John was at least greater than Philip or
Thoraas. Krenkel supposes that they were mentioned iu the order of the date of their
death (e.g., Philip died much earlier than John). Lightfoot suggests that they were
mentioned in the same order as in John's Gospel. Had John the Presbyter been as
famous as Keim supposes, would not Keim's own principles lead us to expect him to
be earlier in the list of disciples than that obscure Aristion ? Can it be that John
and Matthew are mentioned together as being the two Evangelists ?
5. Eusebius does not refer the hallucinations of Papias to John, but says that
Papias misunderstood the apostolical expositions. Even if the "elders" quoted by
Irenseus mean Papias, and such as he, any extravagances may be due to them, and
not to their teacher. ^ In addition, let us note the well-known fact that Irenaeus
says he knew Polycarp intimately. (See Irenaeus's letter to Florinus.) Is it con
ceivable that he could be mistaken as to the John of whom his master was wont to
speak so constantly ? Is it possible that he would have written to a fellow-scholar (now
a Gnostic), reminding him of this John, if he were not sure that his correspondent
knew for certain which John he meant ? Further, if Irenaeus were mistaken as to
Polycarp's meaning, could he have continued under the mistake after reading
Papias's book ? We must conclude, after considering such questions as these, that
Polycarp intended his disciples to suppose that he spoke of the son of Zebedee, and
we cannot assume that the old man deliberately set himself to deceive them.
Finally, there is independent testimony in favour of John the Apostle having
been in Ephesus. ApoUonius, the anti- Montanist (a.d. 170-180), believed in the
Ephesian residence of the Apostle John (Eus. H. E. V. 18) ; and Polycrates, Bishop of
Ephesus (a.d. 180), expressly refers to " John who rested on the bosom of our Lord "
as being buried in Ephesus. ^
Tradition takes strange shapes, as we see in the reminiscences of Irenaeus himself;
but they are in matters of detail. History could never be written at all, if it were
possible for Irenaeus to be mistaken upon a subject so broad and momentous as Poly
carp's training under the Apostle John.

» There is not even proof that Papias took the parable about " ten thousand fold "
literally, though Irenaeus did.
2 Eusebius tells us (H. E. III. 39) of two pviifiara (tombs ? or memorials ') in
Ephesus ; and the only doubt attaching to them seems to have regarded the Presbv-
ter. In Ignatius ad Eph., c. 11, 2 (Vossian), there is probable reference to Paul and
John in Ephesus, 'Iva iv KXip(f 'E^e(Tiav eiipeBa tSk Xprnnavav, ot Kal toTs diroo-T((Aois
Ttavrore (rvvriaavivSvvdpei'Vn(rovXpu!rov. See Zahn ('Acta Joannis ' 1880 p cliv 1
for a new excursus on the tombs. ' ' ' ' ' ''

BASILIUE.S. • xlvii

VIL— BASILIDES. '
It is scarcely possible to sketch the position of Basilides in the his
tory of evidence for the canonical books without indicating his position
as a philosophical teacher and the founder of a sect. He is said (Euseb.
H. E. IV.) to have written " twenty-four books upon the Gospel ; " and
controversy immediately begins as to what "the Gospel" was, and
what is meant by writing upon it ? And the shortest answer to ques
tions which spring up must include some notice of his general position.
Basilides was born in Syria, and was possibly, along with Saturninus,
a disciple of Menander. He went to Egypt, like Cerinthus, and was
known there about a.d. 125.^ He seems also to have taught the Per
sians (see p. 390). He was the author of a notable Gnostic theory of
the universe, and he claimed for it that it truly represented the teach
ing of Peter. His system is expounded at considerable length by
Irenseus and by Hippolytus, and is often alluded to and confuted by
Clement of Alexandria.^ It is not easy to reconstruct it from these
notices ; nor is it always po'ssible to say how far his followers had gone
beyond his own lines.* But he seems to have sought to embrace all
the universe in one plan, of which Jesus Christ is the centre, and to
have broken down in the attempt to combine Egyptian speculation with
Scripture truth. He was anxious, with Egyptian sages, to maintain
that the supreme God cannot reveal Himself ; * he was equally anxious,
with Christians, to admit that the Old and New Testaments contain a
real and true revelation ; and so he invented " Archons " great enough
to be authors of revelation. He did not take refuge in the notion of
the inherent evil of matter : he believed creation and providence to be
the works of God. He even said, " I would say anything rather than
blame Providence."^ The mysteries of the world he believed to be
1 There is concurrence from all sides in his having flourished in Hadrian's reign,
A.D. 117-138.
2 See a collection of passages containing fragments of the writings of the Gnostics
to whom Irenaeus alludes in Stieren's Irenaeus, vol. i. p. 901, &c.
3 Clem. Alex. (Strom. III. 1, p. 510) expressly says that the founders of the sect do
not sanction his contemporaries, the Basilideans, in their Antinomian tenet that sins
of incontinence do not hurt the perfect man, ^ire! jurjSE toCto avrols irpdrreiv irvyxapov-
(Tiv ot irpaTr&Topes rav Soyfidrav. Lardner does not succeed in explaining this away.
See Lardner, vol. i. p. 543.
* Probably it was owing to his Egyptian training that he is said (see Eus. H. E. IV.
11) to have spoken of Barcabbas and Barcoph as prophets, and others also. Isidore,
his son, also commented on Parchor — (Clem. Alex., Strom. VI. 6, p. 767).
5 Clem. Alex., Strom. IV. 12, p. 600.

xlviii INTRODUCTION.
due to our inability to see causes and effects together. And yet when,,,
in his attempt to lessen the mystery of creation out of nothing, he says
that from the unknown supreme God there came a germ out of which
all existing things were evolved, he is forced to hold that in this germ
were several grades of being, of whioh the lowest seems to be some
how bound up meanwhile with material existence from which it will
be eventually disengaged. It seems, therefore, as though the necessary
result of the unthinkable God producing the germ was the production
of the material world along with the spiritual. It seems as though
moral evil were only imperfection caused by the proximity of some
substance less refined than pure spirit. And from this tenet would
easily come many of the gross immoral consequences in practical con
duct with which even Clement of Alexandria charges his schooL-'
Clement shows that a pure moral condition iS not with the Basilideans a
result of God's forgiveness and of the work of God in man, but of ante
cedent necessity arising from the composition of the human nature in
the particular individual.^ In short, with Basilides, as with all who
magnify the infiuence of matter, the fact and the sense of sin were
obscured.* Nevertheless Basilides scouted the idea of emanations,* and
thought that he had bridged the chasm between spirit and the universe
by the invention of his eggs or germs with resulting Archons — one the
head of an ogdoad, and the other of a hebdomad ; and he thought that
he had found a central place for Jesus Christ ^ by representing Him as
the embodiment of the great Gospel with which the Archon's Son
enlightened all the principalities and powers, and all different orders of
being, including man.
It is easy to see that his aim was to expand and explain the teach
ing of John's Gospel as to the creation by the Logos, and the mysterious
allusions in some of the Pauline Epistles to God reconciling aU things
(toi rrdvTo) to Himself by Jesus Christ.^ His system was a philosophy,
not a religion : a philosophy, however, applying to practical life, and
not merely an intellectual exercitation.
1 Clem. Alex., Strom. III. 1, p. 510, &c. Bunsen (Hipp. 1, 111) thinks that Basi
lides "clung to the old philosophy of Egypt aud Asia, that evil triumphs in this
world of ours. " But this does not seem to be accurate.
" Ibid., II. 20, p. 488. Oi S' d/i<^l BacriXelSrivTcpoa-apT-lipjira to irdBri koAeTj- eldBiuriv,
* See Clem. Alex., Strom. III. 1, p. 510, for an allegation that Isidorus recom'-
mended a man to gratify pressing lusts in order that he might pray with more devout
mind. * See text under John's Gospel — Basilides.
^ " Since it was needful that it should be revealed that we are the children of God
in expectation of whose revelation the creation groaned and habitually travailed in
pain, the Gospel came into the world and permeated all authority and power and
dominion, and every name that is named." — Hipp. 7, 13.
" Jerome says he rejected Timothy, Titus, and Hebrews. This is probable enough
in itself, as the contents of those books must have stood in the way of his system ¦
but other antagonists do not charge him with either rejecting or mutilating (however
much he perverted) any of the books of the New Testament. See Jerome Pref. to
Comment, on Titus.

BASILIDES. xlix
He did not wish to be an opponent of the Gospel ; and he professed
to represent the true doctrines of St Peter, which he had received
through his teacher Glaucias, the interpreter of Peter.^ He (or his
followers for him) also claimed. to expound the doctrine of Matthias,
who had received it privately from the Saviour Himself.^ In this, like
other Gnostics, he wished to find some excuse for his obvious disagree
ment with the Gospel of Christ as ordinarily received among men. The
twenty-four books of which Eusebius tells us — " exegetical books "
Clement calls them ; " tractates " according to Archelaus — seem to have
been discourses advocating his own philosophy of religion. The curious
paraphrases of important texts preserved by Hippolytus, and the equally
curious ethical consequences which roused the wrath of Clement, seem
to me to make this clear enough. And is there any improbability in the
supposition that he issued also some abridgment of this as his own view
of the Gospel — as Christianity according to Basilides ? * Origen says :
" Basilides was audacious enough to write a Gospel, and to call it by
his own name." And Origen — or rather the Latin version of Origen's
Homilies on Luke — remains our authority for this. Even if we take
Origen's statement as fact, we cannot interpret this as meaning that
Basilides used a form of the Gospel according to the Hebrews,* or that
he set np any narrative as a rival to the canonical books, because we
do not hear anything about such a book from those who wrote most
fully of his system, and we do hear explicitly that he and his followers
adopted the same account of the Saviour's life as other Christians did.
After an account of Jesus' birth, Hippolytus (IIL 27) says : " After His
[Jesus'] birth had taken place as aforesaid, all things regarding the
Saviour, according to them [the BasUideans], took place as has been
written in the Gospels." And Clement tells us that they observed
the night of the Lord's baptism as a festival, spending it in special
reading.^ We conclude, therefore, from the allusions and quotations in early
writers, that BasiUdes was not known to reject any of the books of the
New Testament; that he set himself to reconcile the Christian Scrip
tures with Egyptian philosophy ; that he wrote an elaborate treatise
in twenty-four books on " the Gospel," by which we suppose that he
meant the Christian system ; ^ that his system led to well-understood
' Clem. Alex., Strom. VII. 17, p. 898.
2 See Hipp. VII. 20, and Clem. Alex., Strom. VII. 17. Sorae read "Matthew
here. According to Clement, it was the boast of Basilides's followers that he claimed
Glaucias for his teacher, — ' ' k&v tXavKlav iTriypd(prirai SiSda-KaXov as avxova-iv airoi," —
whereas the claim to represent Matthew or Matthias maybe the doing of his followers,
although this is not clear. Hippolytus distinctly says that both Basilides and Isidore
made this claim. He calls Isidore the " genuine son and disciple " of Basilides.
' " Euo77e'Aioi' ia-rl Kar atirohs rj rav virepKoa-iJ,iav yva(ns." — Hipp. Haer. 7, 27.
* Sup. Rei., vol. ii. p. 43.
5 Clem. Alex., Strom. I. 21, p. 408.
" I do not see that we can go further than this from the words of Eusebius ; but
d

1 INTEODUCTION.
consequences as to the evil of matter and the non-importance of bodily
indulgence, which, in the lives of his foUowers, produced flagrant im
morality. When we go further, and ask what the written records were
from which he quoted, or on whioh he commented, we can not only say
that he accepts the facts of ordinary Christiaii narrative, but we have
also good grounds for believing that they were our canonical books,
because we find passages from Matthe-w and Luke and John. Those
passages are found in our text, with specific notes, and the reader is
referred to them. They refer to the Magi and the star (Mat. ii. 1) ; to
eunuohs and continence (Mat. xix. 11); to casting pearls before swine
(Mat. vii. 6) ; to the Holy Spirit overshadowing the mother of Jesus,
and the power of the Highest coming upon her (Luke i. 35) ; to the
saying of Jesus found in the Fourth Gospel, " Mine hour is not yet
come " (John ii. 4) ; and, above all, to the language of the Prologue,.
" This is the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the
world " (John i. 9). There are numerous passages from the epistles
also. These references have additional importance from the fact that
they are preceded by such phrases as to elpr]p.evov, us yeypairrai, -tj ypatj^rj
XsyEt.! It is to be observed, also, that when we are told of the Basilideans
accepting the Gospel record, it is described as " what is written in the
Gospels ; " ^ and when the Prologue to John is quoted, it is as " said in
the Gospels." Do we go beyond the indications when we conclude
that while " the Gospel " meant the " Christian system," the Basilideans
acknowledged a plurality of books which correspond with our own, and
that they termed these, as we do, " the Gospels " ?
But it is said in reply that the quotations of Hippolytus are so in
definite as to make it doubtful whether he quoted from Basilides him
self or from some Basilidean of much later date.* The value of the
quotations from John depends on the weight attached to this reply.
It does not seem to me possible to read Hipp. VII. 22, with its distinct
we can certainly deny, on the strength of the passage, any theory that Basilides's
work was a commentary on his own Gospel. Hippolytus (Ref. 7, 27) says : " Gospel
is with the Basilideans the knowledge of supra-mundane things ; " and he goes on to
define these as the Holy Spirit aud the Sonship, and adds ; " This, according to them,
is the Gospel," rh evayyeXtov. This meaning is also found in the passage quoted in
a pre-vious note (see note 3), to the effect that the Gospel is the revelation that we
are the sons of God.
1 Thus, in one chapter, VII. 26 (p. 372, Duncker), we find rh elpriixevov for Prov.
i. 7 ; Ps. xxxi. 5 ; Luke i. 35 (a strictly verbal quotation) ; rt ypa^ii Xeyei for 1 Cor.
ii. 13 ; Ka9i)$ yeypairrai for 2 Cor. xii. 4 ; besides an inweaving of Eph. iii. 3. And
vii. 22, puts in apposition, rh XexBev liTri Muxre'ws, "Let there be light," and to Xey6-
fievov iv rols eyayyeXiois, "He was the true light," &c. In this sam.e chapter (22),
Ps. cxxxii. 2 is cited as rh Xey6pevov.
2 Not "in the Gospel," as Sup. Rei., vol. i. p. 47.
" Hipp., VII. 19, says that Basilides will be convicted of foisting Aristotelian philo
sophy upon the Gospel, so that his followers will be made to see that they are pagans
not true Christians at all. Then he goes on (VII. 20) to show how manifestly Basil
ides, as well as Isidore and their whole sect, give the lie not only to Matthew but
to the Saviour Himself. '

BASILIDES. li
bearing on Basilides himself, as shown by the way Hippolytus intro
duces him, and to suppose that any one but Basilides is meant as the
author by whom the Prologue to John (i. 9) is founded upon.i The
other quotation in c. 27 naturally seems to be made by Basilides also,
even although, in the following sentence, the whole school [Kar avrov?)
are said to apply the doctrine to the spiritual man within the natural
man. But even if we give up the second, the first mentioned of the
citations from Jolm by Basilides remains distinct. This is a question
of fact to which no doubt a reader's prepossessions tend to shape his
reply, however much he may strive to be impartial. But I would sub
mit that the difficulty of referring it to any other than Basilides is
enormous.^ The fundamental written dogma of the school is at stake ;
Hippolytus is showing how that dogma was against the theory of
emanations : he is not dealing (as Clement often did) with practical con
sequences, but with the very foundation itself ; and if that foundation
was not laid by Basilides himself, by whom was it laid ? Beyond the
trouble into which opponents of the authenticity of John are put by
Basilides's quoting, is there any ground for believing that in the Basili
dean school there was another great philosopher and writer subsequent to
the founder's o-wn day who was accepted, when Hippolytus wrote eighty
or a hundred years after, as the true representative and champion of
Basilidean philosophy ? We know of Basilides and his works ; we know
he had many followers, who are often spoken of as plural ; but who is
this other notable one ? * It can hardly have been Isidore, who was a
much inferior man to his father ; * and we know not that any other
existed great enough.
But again, it is said that the very use of the formulas, " It is written,"
&c., shows that the citations are not made by Basilides, because in his
day such formulse were not applied to the New Testament. Is not
this, however, to beg the question ? If Basilides applied them, they
were so appUed. " But," says the author of ' Supernatural Eeligion,'
" the writings of pseudo-Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Papias,
1 In one passage (VII. 26) Hipp, seems to distinguish between the primary'doctrines
of Basilides and the secondary ones (Abraxas, &c. ) of his followers. See (j^no-i and kot'
avTois. It is often said that in Hipp. V. 7 we have (pa<rlv ot "EXXrives, and then soon
after Pindar quoted -vvith <^7)(r(, though Pindar is not named. But is it not rather
the representative of the Naassenes who is referred to ? He was quoted with ^vcri in
the end of the previous chapter, and now it is not Pindar but this same man as using
the hymn (which the Greeks use) that is quoted.
2 " L'auteur des Philosophoumena a sans doute fait cette analyse sur les ouvrages
originaux de Basilide."— Renan, I'Eglise chretienne, p. 158. .
3 Hippolytus, at the end of the extract beginning iKelvoi Xeyovai, seems to specify
a single contemporary doctrme for whioh the word (pv(riv shows that he holds
Basilides himself responsible. After the reference to the star (VII. 27) with <))r,<r£, he
says : " OStos ia-rlv S Kar' aiirobs vevortpAvos e(ra &vBp(inros irvevpanKOs.
* And the author of Sup. Rei. agrees with orthodox critics that Isidore cannot be
shown frora his extant fragments to have used Scripture in the same way, or at all.
— Sup. Rei., vol. ii. p. 48.

lii INTRODUCTION.
Hegesippus, and others of the Fathers, in several ways positively de
monstrate that the New Testament writings were not admitted, even
amongst orthodox Fathers, to the rank of Holy Scripture until a very
much later period." ^ It is not easy to say what he means in this con
nection by pseudo-Ignatius or his date, seeing that he refers the Ignatian
epistles elsewhere to the end of the second or beginning of the third cen
tury, — " if indeed they possess any value at all." Is " Ignatius," after
all, a genuine witness for the usage in Basilides's day ? Or does he
mean to say that in the beginning of the third century men did not re
gard the New Testament as Scripture ? As to Justin Martyr, he wrote
no commentary on the Gospel which has come to our day, nor did he
found a philosophical system on it ; and his Apology to heathen, and
disputation with a Jew, are works of a very different kind from a treatise
intended to commend Christian philosophy to Christians. Eeverent
quotations are natural in such a treatise — natural even if the reverence
were consciously hollow, — still more natural if Basilides had honestly
convinced himself that his philosophy was a framework in which the
Gospel truths could be combined in new beauty and power. On Poly
carp — we presume the epistle bearing his name is meant — the author
heaps strong condemnation elsewhere, saying that " upon no intemal
ground can any part of this epistle be pronounced genuine ; there are
potent reasons for considering it spurious, and there is no evidence
of any value whatever supporting its authenticity. In any case it
could only be connected with the very latest years of Polycarp's life,"
— i.e., some time after a.d. 160, when he was a deputy sent to Eome.
And how, then, can an unauthentic letter of, say a.d. 162, tell us how
a philosopher and legate, thirty years before, was likely to use written
Gospels ? As to the scraps of Papias, and the fragments of Hegesippus,
it is really beside the point to speak of them in this connection. We
might indeed found on Papias's testimony to the existence of Matthew
and Mark before his time, and on what Hegesippus tells us of the
purity and sound doctrine of the Church everywhere in his day. We
might show from them how necessary it would be for Basilides to deal re
spectfully with the Christian records if he wished to get a hearing from
contemporary Christians. But without taking any such positive ground,
we may well negatively remind ourselves that to quote fragments of
chroniclers and historians as guides in what must have been the mode
of quotation adopted by a philosophical exegete is unwarrantable.
We conclude, therefore, that Basilides knew, quoted, and commented
upon John's Gospel about the end of the first quarter of the second
century.^ ^ Sup. Rei., vol. ii. p. 55.
^ There are also references to several of the Pauline Epistles. See Hort's article
"Basilides" in Smith's Diet, of Christian Biography, 1877.

JUSTIN MARTYE. liii

Note on the System of Basilides.
There is some difficulty iu reconciling Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the accounts
they give of the system. Some (see Luthardt, St John, p. 100) give up the prob
lem. But it may be suggested that Irenaeus seems to begin lower down in the
stream of Basilides's thought than Hippolytus. Irenaeus seems to strike in at the
stage of the Archons. Irenasus speaks of the " unknown Father," who raay be re-
¦ garded as "the unknown God" in the account giveu by Hippolytus; but he says
that "Nous was the first-born of the unborn Father, and Nous is the Christ who
carae at a later stage to bestow deliverance on them that believe in Him from the
power of those who made the world. He appeared then on earth as a raan to the
nations of these powers, and wrought miracles. " In this Irenaeus seems to regard
the chief Archou as the unborn Father ; and, omitting the incomprehensible super
fluous speculations on the Deity and the germ, to begin at once with the supreme
Archon. We seem to have in his account an enumeration of the powers or attri
butes that composed the Ogdoad of which Hippolytus speaks elliptically ; for although
Irenaius does not speak of the Ogdoad, he does enumerate Nous, Logos, Phronesis,
Sophia, Dunarais, as successive generations — five in nuraber ; and we learn from
Clem. Alex, that Dikaiosuue and Eirene were also in the list. These, with the Su
preme Being, make an Ogdoad, and thus we have Irenaeus in substantial agreement
with Hippolytus, although he gives rather the substance and issues than the founda
tion of the speculations of Basilides. Hence those speculations appear more panthe
istic in Hippolytus, more dualistic in Irenaeus, — the former being the intention of
the philosopher, but the latter the necessity which ruled him.

VIIL— JUSTIN MAETYE.
Justin Martyb, — a native of Samaria, apparently a Gentile by birth,
certainly uncircumcised ; originally a student of phUosophy (the Pla
tonic in particular), afterwards attracted to the side of the Christians by
their disregard of carnal enjoyments and their contempt for death, and
finally, not only a believer in the Gospel, but a witness for it in various
parts of the earth, even unto death, — is especially important in the his
tory of the canon, because of the position he occupies as equidistant
from the Apostle John on the one hand and Irenreus on the other.
In recent years the recovery of the long-lost work of Hippolytus, and
of the close of the Clementine HomiUes, has made Justin's testimony
less soUtary than it seemed formerly to be. When the phUosophical
Gnostic,^ as reported by Hippolytus, founds upon John's Gospel, and
the ultra-Judaic Christian ^ does the same, the contemporary (or sub-
1 Basilides, in Hipp. VII. 10. ^ Clem. Hom. XIX. 22.

liv INTRODUCTION.
sequent) testimony of Justin is no longer an isolated position open to
attack from all sides.
But still there is something special in Justin's work which demands
close attention. His first " Apology " was probably presented to the
Eoman emperor between a.d. 139 and a.d. 146. It is about 40 years since
the Apostle John died ; 30 or 40 years afterwards (a.d. 177) Irenseus
succeeded to the bishopric of Lyons. We do not know for certain the
date of Justin's birth, but he was in all probability a contemporary of
both the Apostle and the great GaUican Bishop. The Asiatic and
the Eoman Churches with whioh they were respectively associated
must have been familiarly known to him, for his " Dialogue " was held
in Ephesus, and he lived also in Eome. He is a Unk, too, between
what we may call the direct line and many collateral sections of the
Christian Church. Being a native of Samaria, he speaks of the
great Samaritan heresiarch Simon, as one whose Ufe and work in Eome
and in Samaria were familiarly known to him. Menander, the other
Samaritan heretic, had disciples still living who believed in his promise
that because of their adherence to him they should never die. And
though his work against the great heretic of Sinope is unfortunately
lost, we know that he was well aware of the nature of the heresy.
" Ahd there is Marcion, a native of Pontus, who is even at this day
alive and teaching his disciples to believe in some other God greater
than the Creator." ^
It is even possible that Eome may have contained within its walls
at one and the same time Marcion, Cerdo, Tatian, Valentinus, and Justin
Martyr. We have knowledge of what Marcion's Canon contained ; we
know that Tatian, Justin's pupil, made a harmony of the four Gospels ; ^
we know that Valentinus used a complete canon {integrum instrumen
tum) ; we know how clear and full is the testimony of Justin's younger
contemporary, Irenseus, to the existence and general reception of all
the principal parts of our canon ; and we might expect to find Justin
giving evidence on the same side. If the Gospels and Epistles re
ceived by Irenffius were the same as Justin used, then is our chain
of testimony complete.
But here arises the question which has for a hundred years
bulked more largely than any other in the critical controversies re
garding the history of the canon. There can be no doubt that Justin
makes large and interesting reference to the life and words of Jesus
Christ ; and there can be no doubt that he refers for evidence to writ-
1 Apol. I. c. 26. (Hort fixes a.d. 145 or 146 for the Apology.)
2 Is it possible that Justin used a harmony, which the pupil afterwards developed
into the famous DiatessarSn? or that Justin's mode of quoting, by fusing the synoptic
narratives into such consistency as served his purpose, suggested to Tatian the idea
ot thoroughly fusing them? It is doubtful if Tatian's was a " harmony "iu the
sense of collocation. Certainly Tatian's was not the same as Justin's, because Ta
tian omitted the genealogies, aud the descent of Jesus frora David.

JUSTIN MAETYE. Iv
ten documents. There can be no doubt of the substantial conformity of
his version of evangelical history with that of our Gospels ; but the
question is, whether the canonical Gospels are the sources of his quo
tations ? It has been alleged that he quoted from the now lost " Ur-
Evangelium" or primary Gospel, .or that (Stroth) the mysterious
" Gospel of the Hebrews " is his authority. It has been aUeged that
he quoted from apocryphal books, either in preference to, or along
¦with, the canonical : and, on the other hand, it has been alleged — more
accurately, we think — that he knew and habitually cited our canoni
cal books, but that he cited them loosely from memory, and that he
did not hesitate on occasion to weave into his statement such addi
tional particulars as he derived from tradition or from apocryphal
sources. We tum to his -writings to learn for ourselves. But the first fact
which strikes us is, that the peculiar nature of those works limits
very much the amount of direct testimony which they can give. His
genuine writings are now generally admitted to be three in number —
if indeed they be not two. There are two Apologies^ (or more probably
two parts of one Apology) presented to a heathen emperor ; and a
Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew. The very nature of the case prevents
us from expecting, in such writings, references to the books of the
New Testament as inspired authorities. The object of the Apology is
to defend Christians from many foul accusations brought against their
life and character by the vulgar rumours of Eome. Justin proves that
Christians are honourable (c. 12) ; peace-loving and continent (c. 21) ;
good citizens (c. 17) ; followers of one whom ancient prophecies foretold
(c. 47) ; that they use a simple ritual (chaps. 65, 67), and practise
the most self-denying charity towards one another as brethren, and as
under the eye of one God and Maker of all. " We continually remind
ourselves of these things, and the wealthy among us help the needy ;
and we always keep together : and for all things wherewith we are
supplied, we bless the Maker of all, through His Son Jesus Christ, and
through the Holy Ghost." ^ It is obvious, when we consider the ob
ject in the writer's view, that there could be little direct quotation in
1 The first Apology is addressed to the Emperor Titus M\ms Adrianus Antoninus
Pius Augustus Caesar. It probably dates from a.d. 139. Eusebius tells us that he
addressed another Apology to Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, and that he sufi'ered
martyrdom during that emperor's reign. The most certain indications of date -we
can gather from his writings are allusions to the Jewish war under Barcoeheba in
A.D. 181-136, of which he speaks as a recent event: see Apol. I. c. 31 ; Dial. c. 1,
c. 9. He alludes to the death of Christ as an event of 150 years before ; and refers
to Hadrian's decree, Apol. I. 47, Dial. c. 10, banishing the Jews from Jerusalem, and
to the deification of Antinous, Apol. I. c. 29, as recent events. The other works as
cribed to him— "To Diognetus," see p. 65, two Addresses to Greeks, and "De Mon-
archia "—are not now considered to be his. Nor is a fragmentary Treatise on the
Resurrection to be founded upon, though it may be quoted with reserve.
¦^ Compare Luciau's description of the experiences of Peregrinus Proteus.

lvi INTEODUCTION.
the " Apology," and that all we can expect is a general agreement in
tone and apparent historical basis with our Scriptures. That agree
ment we have beyond aU question. But we have not such appeals to
the New Testament as Irenseus and TertulUan make when discussing
some point of doctrine ; and we have no right to expect them. It is
the unvarying characteristic of Christian apologists not to quote the
Gospels by the titles in use among Christians. In other works they
did so quote the Gospels, but never in their " Apologies " addressed to
the heathen. The argument that because Justin does not name our
evangeUsts, he did not know them, would, if applied to others, lead to
absurd results. It would prove that Tatian, who never names them
in his oration to the Gentiles, did not know them, though we know
that he wrote a harmony of the four ; that Tertullian, who, in his
Apology, never names them, and seldom uses their language, did
not know them, though his other writings are a rich mine of distinct
quotation ; that even Cyprian did not know them, because in his de
fence of Christianity, addressed to a heathen, he does not name them.^
We turn from the Apology to the Dialogue with Trypho, and we find
that it turns upon the Scriptures — but it is upon the Old Testament.
Justin represents himself as accosted by Trypho one day when he was
walking ; and in the conversation which ensued, it soon appeared that
although Trypho was a student of Greek philosophy, he was also a
Jewish fugitive from the recent war of Barcoeheba. Trypho, represent
ing the prejudice of his nation, charged all Christians with having ac
cepted a baseless rumour as the foundation of their religion, and with
having formed a kind of Christ for themselves, so that they were
perishing thoughtlessly. Justin began to defend his creed ; and as his
opponent and he had one point in common — acceptance of the Old
Testament Scriptures — the argument (see chaps. 32, 55, 56, 71) tums
upon it. Not that the Christian records were ignored, for Trypho had
read them (c. 10), and Justin therefore says that he does not think it
absurd to quote the short records of the Saviour's doings along with
the prophecies.^ But Justin uses the Christian books only as histori
cal material for his position, that Jesus Christ of Nazareth, who lived
and died and rose again, is the Eevealer of the Father and the Saviour
of men ; and the aim of the Dialogue is to show that the true meaning
of the very words of the Prophets and Psalms and Pentateuch is ful
filled in this Christ. It is clear that in an argument of this kind, ver
bal dependence on the Gospels or Epistles of the New Testament is
not to be expected. But it is equally clear that if our sacred books be
the records of the truth, as held by the Church of the first days, we
shall find in this dialogue that the Christ of whom Justin discoursed
eo copiously is the same as He of whom our evangelists -wrote, and
^ See Norton on the Gospels, vol. i. p. 137.
' B/joxe'o rav iKeivov (so. ^arrjpos) \oyla, c. 18. So, Ppaxeh Xoyoi, Apol. I. 14.

JUSTIN MARTYR. Ivii
whom Paul preached. Now that the Christ to whom Justin gave his
soul is the Eedeemer whom we worship, we have abundant proof.
Jesus Christ, according to Justin, is the God who manifested Him
self unto Israel of old, for no man ever saw the Father who is Lord of
all ; He is the Word (see Dial, chaps. 146, 147, &c.) ; the Son of
God, who became man (Apol. I. 5) ; was born of a virgin, sheltered in
Egypt, grew up in obscurity until He was 30 years of age, taught,
healed, did miracles, was crucified, dead and buried, and the third day
rose again ; fiUed His disciples with knowledge, and gave them their
commission to teach all nations ; was the light to lighten the Gentiles,
and the glory of His people Israel. In short, the incidents of the
Saviour's birth, life, death, and rising again, as the incarnate Son of
God, are actually stated or unquestionably implied in Justin's writings.
His teaching also is beautifully represented (see Dial. 93, and also
Apol L, chaps. 15, 16, 17, 18).
Thus there can be no doubt ofthe substantial agreement of Justin's
Gospel -with the Synoptic Gospels ; but the question comes to turn
upon the form of Justin's citations and references. Can it be that
Justin used the first form of the Gospel — rrpSiTov eiayyeXiov — now lost,
which was afterwards altered so as to take on, after much labour, the
form of our present Gospels ?
We shall most succinctly define what we believe to be the true
position in the controversy regarding Justin's quotations, by noting
these three points.
1. While Justin based his proof of Christianity on the Old Testament
as a whole, he founded especiaUy on Old Testament prophecy. His most
elaborate arguments are expositions of Psalms xxii. (Dial. 98-106),
cx. (c. 33), and Ixxii. (c. 34). To him almost all the Old Testa
ment is Messianic. His quotations fi-om the Old Testament prophecies
are — as it is obviously indispensable that they should be — explicit,
accompanied (not always correctly) with the name of the author from
whom the quotation is made ; and while shorter passages seem to be
quoted from memory, the longer are verbaUy correct. It is noteworthy,
also, that the only book of the New Testament which he quotes by
name is the only prophetic book — the Apocalypse — from which he
cites the passage predicting the millennium.
2. He alluded to the Gospels as historical documents, though he did not
claim for them (it is not clear how his object in quoting would have
been served by doing so) the same position as for the Old Testament
prophecies. He appeals to them as historical documents under the
name of dTrop,vr]poveijp,aTa tSv aTroo-ToXcoj'.^ He describes them as con
taining " all things which concern our Saviour Jesus Christ " — Apol. II.
75. He says they "were written by the Apostles, and are caUed
1 Justin makes it clear, in his more detailed descriptions, that he means "Me
moirs by the Apostles," not " Memoirs of." See below, p. Ixi.

Iviii INTEODUCTION.
Gospels." 1 He says they were read on Sundays to the congregations,
along with (and apparently on the same level as) the writings of the
prophets, and that oral public teaching of the audience was founded on
their contents — Apol. 1, 67. Nay more, in words which remind us of St
Luke's Preface,^ he says, " In the Memoirs which I affirm to have been
composed by his Apostles, and those who followed with them, it is
written that sweat feU from Him like drops of blood while He was
praying, and saying. Let this cup, if it be possible, pass from me " — Dial.
c. 103.* In these expressions separate works are apparently aUuded
to : on other occasions the word cwyyE'Xtov* seems to be applied in the
same general way as by ourselves, to denote the tenor of the written
records of Christianity (see Dial. 10, 100). But when Justin is under
the necessity of advancing statements of facts which are recorded
in the Gospels, he refers to them as the authoritative books of the
Christians, lest it should be supposed that he is drawing on his own
imagination for his facts.®
In thus quoting the "Memoirs," Justin quotes books which were
not only accessible but also known to opponents, whether heathen or
Jewish. Trypho says he has read them. It is therefore clear that
there were in Justin's day certain well-known historical documents
whose contents were " The Gospel ; " which were themselves caUed
" Gospels ; " which were written by Apostles and their companions ;
and whose characteristics are indicated in Justin's term " Memoirs " —
Memorabilia. Everything here seems to identify those Memoirs of
Justin's with our canonical books. It is true he does not quote them
by name in his works which remain ; but it would have been cumber
some to do so. His one New Testament quotation, wliich he accom
panies with the name of its author, is so extremely ofrcuitous and cir
cumstantial, as to show why he makes that kind of reference very
rarely. " And a certain man among ourselves, whose name was John,
one of the Apostles of Christ, in the Eevelation which was made to
him, prophesied that those who believe in our Christ wiU spend a
thousand years in Jerusalem." There is something very suggestive
in this circumlocution (Dial. 81).
3. Justin's position in the history of the Church accounts for the nature
and limits of his quotations. His lifetime stretched across the period
1 It seems idle to discuss the assertion that this clause is an interpolation. There
is no ground for it, save that it is necessary to the theory that Justin's " Memoirs "
are not our Gospels. But since the assertion is made, the passage cannot of itself be
conclusive proof that Justin used our synoptics.
2 All the more so, that it occurs in connection with the mention of the sweat
which we find in Luke's Gospel.
' Thus Tertullian (Adv. Marc. 4, 2) says Apostoli and Apostolici are the authors
of the instrumentum evangelicum.
* The word in its Christian sense would not have been intelligible to a mere
Greek reader.
^ See general references to authorities, p. 59 ; express citations, p. 62.

JUSTIN MAETYE. lix
which connected the traditions with the written records of the life of
Christ; for during it the men whose ears had heard the first oral
preaching of Christ's Gospel died out, and it was therefore the time
when the indispensable necessity of written Gospels was first clearly
seen. We do not assume that he quoted our canonical Gospels ;
but it is right to notice that if he did use them, it was natural that
he should use them freely, not slavishly, and also that he should sup
plement them with little items derived from traditional or apocryphal
sources. To account for his using them freely, let us remember that
Justin must have met with many who had heard the first Apostles
preach, — hundreds, we may say, who knew John in Ephesus. And in
such circumstances, general allusions to the written records, rather
than strict verbal quotations from them, are what we may expect.
Nor need we wonder if he so supplements the canonical Gospels
as to agree with some apocryphal writers in forms of expression
whioh had come down to him and them by tradition. One or two
passages, too trifling to bear much strain, show this amount of
agreement with the Clementine Homilies. The text^ shows that the
agreement is accompanied by striking divergences : and the passages
themselves are quoted in remarkably various ways by early authors,
both orthodox and heretical. One or two other passages contain inci
dents the same as are recorded in our Gospels, but with additions of
no great moment, such as may have come to Justin from apocryphal
books or from oral tradition. That Jesus was born in a cave near the
village of Bethlehem ; that the Magi came from Arabia ; that Herod
slew all the children of Betlilehem ; that Jesus as a carpenter made
ploughs and yokes emblems of righteousness ; that a fire was kindled
on the Jordan at the baptism of Jesus ; that the voice from heaven
at the baptism said. Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee ;
that proofs of Jesus' miracles, and the events of the day of the cruci
fixion, are to be found recorded in an oflficial register called the Acts of
Pilate, — these are the chief, indeed aU the important, peculiarities of
Justin's evangelical narrative. They are examined in detail in the
text ;^ but the general remark may be made here, that -with one exception
they are not said by Justin to be taken from the Memoirs, or from any
other book. That exception (p. 126), moreover, only aUeges the authority
of the Memoirs for the part of the narrative which is not apocryphal.
Even, however, if each and all of them were shown to be quotations of
Justin from other than canonical sources, — nay, even if it were shown
that aU of them, lUie aU Justin's other quotations, came from some
one apocryphal book now lost, — to what would it amount ? Simply to
this, that the book was amazingly like our Gospels ; that throughout
the whole marveUous history of Christ, its narrative is identical with
them in every point of any moment, and that its variations are in
1 Vide infra, p. Ixv. note 8. = Vide infra, pp. 125-127.

Ix INTRODUCTION.
trifles only ; that if we had it in our hands, it would (so far as we can
judge from those specimens) add less, infinitely less, to the historical
incidents than any one of our synoptists does. It is not therefore a
competing, a contradictory, or an incompatible book ; and its exist
ence — if it were established — would only show how thoroughly consoli
dated and consistent was the Gospel narrative accepted in the early
Church. But farther, as a matter of fact, the existence of any such
Gospel in Justin's time cannot be established. That Jesus worked as
a carpenter may be inferred from St Mark, and it is of little moment
to suppose that Justin's allusion (Dial. c. 88) to the ploughs he
made is drawn from the Gospel of Thomas, or from the Arabic Gospel
of the Infancy. The Ebionite Gospel contained the tradition of the
fire on the Jordan, but we have no proof that it contained the other
incidents wherewith Justin supplements the canonical narrative. It
may be that the Gospel of the Hebrews contained the saying, "In
what things soever I find you, in these also shall I judge you ; " but of
this we have no proof. But the inference that any one of those books,
or some other which contained the materials of them all, was the book
which Justin quoted, is not warranted by evidenoe. It is indeed an
assumption ; for we know nothing of any one of those books warranting
a belief that it was complete enough to be Justin's authority. The
best known of them aU — the Gospel of the Hebrews — omitted the
narrative which forms the first two chapters of St Matthew.-*^ It can
not, therefore, have been to it that Justin was indebted.
From what has been stated, and especially from those three gene
ral propositions, we therefore conclude that Justin was acquainted with
our synoptic narratives ; and that he was indebted to oral tradition, or
to those apocryphal Gospels which embodied it, for certain supplemen
tary matters which we find in his -writings. And this is exactly what
we should expect from one writing in the period between the days of
oral teaching and those of entire dependence on written evangeUc
narratives. The objections which are pressed against this conclusion rest mainly
on the name Justin gives to his authority, and on the want of verbal
correspondence between his expressions and the words of our can
onical Gospels.
The name which Justin uses — " Memoirs " — is not, so far as we
know, the title of any book or collection of books used in the early
Church. It is not intended to be a title : it is a description, and as
such is quite correct.^
' The Nazarene form omitted the chief parts ; the Ebionite the whole.
^ The argument that Justin must mean one work, not several works, is based on
a misconception. Bevo^avros iiiropviipoveipaTa was one book, but its genitive is
singular. When we have rav diroariXav for the dependent genitive, we may conclude
that he means several work.s. In one place Justin speaks of iv tois air. avrov, when
the last word seems from the context to mean Peter. And by this phrase, " Peter's

JUSTIN MARTYE. Ixi
It is true that Justin's quotations from our Gospels are not verbally
accurate. But neither are his quotations from the Old Testament.
He seems to have been familiar with the Psalms, probably from their
use in worship, and usually quotes them correctly. All his long
quotations are accurately given, probably because he unrolled his
volume to find them ; but not so his smaller quotations and inciden
tal allusions. He ascribes in one place (Apol. I. 76) to Zephaniah a
passage whicli is found in Zechariah, and to which he himself in
another place gives the correct reference. He speaks of Moses feed
ing his uncle's fiock (Apol. I. 95), and says that as the younger
IsraeUtes in the wilderness grew, so did their clothes grow with them
(Dial. c. 131). In seventeen instances he has repeated the same quota
tion ; and in more than half of them there is a striking want of corre
spondence, either in the words themselves or in their connection with
other words quoted. When he thus deals with the Old Testament,
and when he never even quotes his old master Plato verbatim,^ it is
unreasonable to expect that he would quote the Christian Books with
a verbal carefulness which was unknown to his contemporaries, and
foreign from the spirit of the age.
An examination of the passages which follow in the text will show
the coincidences between Justin and each of the synoptists. Those
from Matthew are most striking in the early history of Jesus, in which
the Judseo-Christian Gospels of an apocryphal kind are deficient ; the
most striking correspondence with Mark is the reference to the be
stowal of the name of Boanerges on the sons of Zebedee ; the most
interesting approach to St Luke is in the fact of the mission of the
angel to Mary, and in the language narrating that fact. But there are
many others. Opinions may differ as to those coincidences being
quotations ; but it seems to me that they are such quotations as we
might expect if Justin had our Gospels in his hand. He seldom quotes
without somewhat altering the language ; and it has been observed
that his variations from the original are usually in the direction of
giving a more classical turn to the originaUy provincial Hellenistic
phraseology. This was probably, in part, an unconscious change ; in
part also intentional, as commending the Gospel to those for whom he
wrote.^ The question of Justin's use of John's Gospel is beset with some
Memoirs," he probably describes Mark's Gospel, which early tradition connected with
Peter. (See Dial. c. 106, and infra, p. 143. Cf. forthe tradition, Tert. Cont. Marc.
4, 5, and Papias in Eus. III. 89. ) He is referring to the change made by Jesus on
Simon's name, and on those of the sons of Zebedee ; and the only passage containing
it is Mark iii. 17. This citation tells strongly against the conjecture that Justin
used a harmony. (See before, p. liv, note 2.)
1 " He quotes Plato seven tiraes in his Apologies and Dialogues : not one of them
is verbatim." — Norton. u . tt- r
2 See reference to Prof. R. Lee's MS paper on this subject iu Donaldson s Hist, ot
Christian Literature, vol. ii. p. 331.

Ixii INTRODUCTION.
peculiar difficulties. The spiritual Gospel, written, as all tradition
tells us, after the other three, is in its nature a supplement to them ;
and an adversary, whether Jew or Christian, was not likely to be
affected in the first instance by arguments from it. Nevertheless,
there are passages in Justin's writings so closely resembling John's
Gospel as to command attention, and to justify those who regard them
as proofs of Justin's acquaintance with the fourth Gospel The most
recent writers are again taking up this position, which, though occupied
by Lardner and others, had been abandoned by writers of our own time
a few years ago.
Take the curious disquisition on the Logos begotten by God in the
beginning (Dial. c. 61) as the medium of revelation in all ages of
history, who is not separated fi-om the Father, and who is himself
God.^ Take the statements as to the new birth ; as to the Word be
coming flesh (Apol. 0. 66) ; the living water, and the celestial habi
tation. With these it seems impossible to doubt that Justin gives us
echoes of the fourth Gospel.
It seems idle to discuss whether Justin knew Paul's Epistles, — idle,
because if Justin knew Marcion's work he knew Paul, and we have
his own words to show that he had grasped the core of Marcion's
speculations. We learn from others that he -wrote a book against
Marcion, now unfortunately lost. He knew also Valentinus's heresy ;
and the integrum instrumentum of that speculator, to which Tertullian
testifies, must have been known to him. The references given in our
text show incidental correspondence with Paul rather than quotation :
show also reasoning from the same point of view, and this is aU that we
have reason to expect in the works of Justin which remain. Eusebius
teUs us that Justin's work on the " Sole Govemment of God " contained
proofs from our Scriptures (ek twv rrap' -fip-iv ypa<i>Qv), and this also is what
we might expect. But to say that Justin did not know Paul's Epis
tles because he does not explicitly quote them in his Apologies and
Dialogues, is based on the assumption that when Justin's primary
purpose was to convince a contemporary heathen or Jew, he must also
have had the secondary aim of showing how many books he knew,
with a view to the critical controversies of the nineteenth century.
In conclusion, it seems as though the controversy about Justin's
knowledge of our Gospels could not be much longer prolonged. Jus
tin quotes memoirs written by Apostles and their companions ; he caUs
them Gospels ; his words are the words we find in our sacred books ;
he says they were used in public worship along with the prophets
every Sunday ; Trypho knew them ; they are described as accessible
to heathen ; Justin's knowledge of Christian truth, whether fact or
doctrine, is bounded by their contents, for the little apocryphal items
are not worthy of being dwelt upon, — and if these things do not prove
* See Drummond in Theol. Rev., April 1877 ; and text, p. 178.

CLEMENTINE HOMILIES, Ixiii
that Justin was a reader of our Evangelists, it is hard to say what
would prove it.
But let us try to suppose that the opposite conclusion is adopted.
The position, then, is that Justin used and Trypho read a Gospel
which cannot be traced elsewhere or afterwards, — a Gospel different
from that which his contemporary Marcion knew and mutilated : a set
of books which so marvellously disappeared that Iren^us (who had
possibly known Justin, and certainly wrote within 30 years of his death),
when he descanted on the four winds, the four quarters of the world,
and the four Gospels, knew nothing of them ; and that Justin, when he
quoted the apocryphal book or books, quoted so strangely that Euse
bius, with all his love of gossip and aU his historical lore, and many
another besides him, never knew that the quotations were not from
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. That is to say, that the Memoirs to
which Justin challenged the attention of the Eoman emperor, senate,
and people, and which were, therefore, well known, had so completely
perished from the earth that Irenseus, who was familiar -with the affairs
of Asia, Eome, and Gaul, appealed to friend and foe to remark how
marvellous is God's great providence in giving to Christendom and to
humanity the four Gospels — the four, neither more nor less — of Mat
thew, Mark, Luke, and John.

IX.— CLEMENTINE HOMILIES.
(See Text, pp. 438-444.)
The apocryphal writing kno-wn as the Clementine Homilies is one of
the most original and important of the many passing under the name
of Clement. The name of Clement, as the voucher for the fictitious
autobiography conveying to us the narrative and the discussions styled
Homilies, gave early currency to the belief that they were the produc
tion of the Bishop of Eome. Accordingly, Sozomen in the fifth cen
tury, following Eufinus and Epiphanius earUer, speaks of Clement as
the earUest of ecclesiastical historians. The work is rather an ecclesi
astical romance with a doctrinal purpose, having St Peter and Simon
Magus for its leading characters, and dealing freely with the facts of
the Gospel and apostoUcal histories. It is written in the interests of
Jud^o-Christianity, and, in the opinion of most critics, belongs to the
middle of the second century. There were other forms of this writing.^
1 Uhlhorn, Die Horailien, p. 75.

lxiv INTEODUCTION.
The most imjDortant of these is the Clementine Eecognitions. Whether
the Homilies or the Eecognitions are the earlier, is a question which has
been much debated among critics.^ The weight and variety of authori
ties are on the side of the Homilies.^ The Eecognitions, moreover, are
extant only in the Latin translations of Eufinus ; and as their quota
tions are more or less assimilated to the passages in the Gospels, they
are in their present form of little value for the purposes of our in
quiry. We shall confine ourselves accordingly to the examination of
the Homilies. The value of this writing was partially apprehended by
Mosheim, and more fully by Neander, but it owes its prominence as a con
troversial work to the use which Baur has made of it for his reconstruc
tion of the early history of the Church.* Additional literary interest
has attached to it since Dressel's discovery of a complete manuscript,
with the help of which some questions relating to the use of the Gos
pels in the Homilies have been set at rest.
The value of the testimony of the Clementine Homilies to the use of
the Gospels is somewhat lessened by our want of certainty as to the
date of their composition. There are indications of some relationship
between them and the writings of Justin Martyr. There is such an
amount of similarity between the quotations in the Clementines and in
Justin, that Credner investigates the two together, and finds the use of
a Petri-Evangelium common to both.* However this may be, the
phenomena of quotation generally are such as to support the view
that the Homilies belong to the middle of the second century. What,
then, are the Gospels used at that time, or about that time, within the
circle to which the author belongs ?
Matthew. — There cannot be a reasonable doubt as to the use of Mat
thew's Gospel. There are several quotations made from it, word for
word, and the passages quoted are in several instances peculiar to
Matthew — compare Horn.. III. 52 with Mat. xi. 28 ; Hom. XIX. 7 -with
Mat. xii. 34 ; Hom. XIX. 2 with Mat. v. 37. But besides these exact
quotations, there is a large number of quotations showing greater or
less agreement with St Matthew's Gospel. There is one passage of
special interest as evidence of this agreement. In Hom. XVIII. 15
Peter is made to quote against Simon Magus the substance of Ps.
lxxviii. 2 (LXX., Ps. Ixxvii. 2), assigning it, however, not to Asaph, as
the LXX., but to Isaiah. Here are the words in the Homily : Kal tov
'HcraW ehreiv' dvoi^io ro a-ropa pLov iv rrapa^oXai? Kal i^epevioaai KeK-
1 Uhlhorn, p. 16 et seq.
^ Cf. Uhlhorn; Sanday, 'The Gospels in the Second Century,' p. 162. See,
above all, Credner's Beitrage, p. 280, for an argument in favour of the priority of the
Homilies, which Hilgenfeld in his ' Kritische Untersuchungen, ' p. 325, does not over
throw, although he is followed by Ritschl, Volkmar, and Lipsius.
" Baur, Die Christliche Gnosis.
* Uhlhorn, p. 112 et seq.; Ciedner's Beitrage, vol. i. pp. 330, 331.

CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. Ixv
pvp,p.eva (XTTO Kara^SoX-^s Koapov. It is remarkable that Matthew has
assigned the substance of this quotation to " the prophet," — whether
with or without 'Ho-a'tou is a point much discussed among textual critics.
Here is the quotation in Matthew : 'Oirtos rrXr^poiO-^ to prjdev Sta ["Ho-a'toi']
ToS TTpocfii^ov, XeyovTOi' avoi^oi ev Trapa^oXai? to crropa pov ipe-v$op.ai kck-
pvp,peva drro Kara/SoXyji KocrpLov (Mat. xiii. 35). In Matthew the Clemen
tine writer may have found the reading with the false ascription, in
stances of which are not rare — e.g., Mark i. 2 ; Mat. xxvii. 9 ; Justin's
Dial c. 28. He certainly did not get his quotation directly from the
LXX., else 'Ho-aiW would be inexplicable. Observe also that his pe
culiar word i^epeviop,ai corresponds mainly with Matthew's ipev^opai, not
with LXX. <j>Oey^op,ai ; and his KeKpvp,p.eva drro Kara^oX^'; Korrpov is lit
eraUy Matthew's as against LXX., ¦KpopX-rip.ara drr dpxrj?. Such striking
resemblances, taken together, furnish evidence for the use of Matthew's
Gospel not to be explained away. It is true that many of the passages
given (see p. 438) bear only a partial resemblance to the corresponding
passages in the Gospels. But when one considers . the nature of the
writing, one would not be surprised were there even fewer verbal coin
cidences. The work is a romance, in which the facts ^ of the Gospel
history are freely handled, and in which the words of Jesus, as given
by the evangelists, might readily be found mutilated and misquoted.
Not to say that the writer certainly treats with much freedom quota
tions from the Old Testament, except when, an argument turning upon
a word, or reference to his authority in a long passage,^ secures a
greater approach to exactness, — one can account for difference in form
amid substantial agreement by paraphrase in accordance with the
plan of the work, or combination of similar passages, or quotations
from memory. The discussion carried on by Peter and Simon Magus
is so managed as to give occasion for quoting from memory or from
hearsay. Deut. xxxiv. 5, quoted in Hom. III. 47, is an illustration of
the Homilist's Old Testament references. The verbal variations and
omissions point to the use of the Septuagint, and the character of
the resemblances speaks for the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew.
We may certainly affirm that the writer of the Homilies was accus
tomed to the use of Matthew's Gospel, — whether in its canonical form,
or as the Gospel of the Hebrews, we need not meanwhile inquire. But
it is needful to say in passing that the theory which assumes Justin
Martyr and the author of the HomiUes to have quoted the same non-
canonical authority (whether it were the Gospel of the Hebrews, or the
Ebionite Gospel, or the Gospel of Peter) cannot survive an actual com
parison of the passages quoted by both. That comparison shows as
great difference between the two as between Justin and the canonical
writings.^ 1 See Hom. IV. 1 ; Hom. XVIL 19, &c. ^ Cf. supra under "Justin."
» Compare Hom. VHL 21 with Dial. oc. 125, 108 ; Hom. III. 5^, XIX. 2, with
e

Ixvi INTRODUCTION.
Luke. — The use of Luke's Gospel is also apparent, although the evi
denoe comes more from allusions than from exact quotation. There are
no quotations altogether verbatim. But Christ's prayer for His craci-
fiers (Hom. XI. 20) ; the emphatic repetition of the injunction to fear
God, and the lesson of patient waiting for God's answer to prayer taught
by the parable of the unjust judge (Hom. XVII. 5) ; the story of Zacchseus
(Hom. III. 63) ; the fall ofthe wicked one as lightning (Hom. XIX. 2);
names written in heaven (Hom. IX. 22), — are introduced with such di
rectness as to point to the use of the third Gospel. When Hilgenfeld ^
says that the Clementine writer was perhaps acquainted with Luke's
Gospel, he fails to do justice to the evidence.^ We may with con
siderable confidence conclude, alike from the allusions themselves and
from the Lucan character they bear when reproduced in the Homilies,
that the use of Luke's Gospel is reasonably made out.
One feature of the Lucan references is the way in which they are
mixed up with passages of Matthew's Gospel. See, for example, Hom.
111. 56, where Mq,t. vii. 9-11 and Luke xi. 11-13 seem to be both in
the Homilist's mind, and to be alternately drawn upon ; Hom. XVII. 5,
which combines Mat. x. 28 and Luke xii. 4, 5 ; and Hom. III. 60, where
both Mat. xxiv. 45-51 and Luke xii. 42-45 are used. The phenomena
of this double resemblance are such, according to Sanday,^ as to ex
clude an earlier document underlying our synoptics, and employed. by
the Clementine writer. They seem to indicate either alternate quota
tions from Matthew and Luke, with occasional expansions or omissions,
or the use of a harmony made at a later time.
Mark. — It is only since Dressel's discovery of the concluding portion
of the Homilies in a Greek MS that the use of Mark has been definite
ly ascertained. There are in the earlier portions of the HomUies allu
sions to the Gospel history pointing with a measure of probabiUty to the
use of Mark. The reference to the Syrophcenician woman (Hom. IL
19) gives Supa ^oLviKLcra-a (Mark vii. 26) ; the summons, aKcwe 'Icrpai^X,
Kvpios o ©EOS a-ov KvpLo<; eTs ea-nv (Hom. III. 57), seems to be from Mark
(xii. 29) ; aud Mark xii. 27 (Mat. xxii. 32), ovk errriv ©eos veKpQv, dXXd
t(!>vT(av, is found exactly reproduced in Hom. III. 55. The decisive
allusion is Hom. XIX. 20, where Mark iv. 34 is evidently in the eye of
the Homilist. The, Homilist says, Sio kol rots ovrov /ia^ijrois Kar iSiai/
irreXve rrji rijiv oipaviSv PacnXeia<; ra puvcrr-^pia, which exhibits striking
agreement with Mark's /car' I8iav Be rois p.a6rfTal<; avrov eweXve rravTa.
Apol. I. 16 ; Hom. III. 57 with Dial. c. 96 (cf. Apol. I. 15) ; Hom. III. 55, Apol.
1. 15 ; Hom. XI. 35, Apol. I. 16 ; Hom. VUl. 4, Dial. c. 76; Hom. XVIH. 5, Apol.
I. 19 ; Hom. XVIII. 4, Apol. L 63 ; Hom. XVIII. 3, Dial. o. 101 ; Hom XV 5,
Apol. L 16 ; Hom. XIX. 2, Dial. c. 76 ; Hom. IIL 18, Dial. c. 17 ; Hom. XI. 26,
Apol. I. 61. See Westcott, Canon, 4th ed., p. 286, from whom this list is taken
1 Krit. Outers. , p. '388.
2 Uhlhorn, p. 121.
3 P. 185.

CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. Ixvii
The verb i-n-iXvia is used only once again in the New Testament, Acts
xix. 39, and the noun imXvo-i.'s appears in 2 Peter i. 20. It is diffi
cult to explain away the force of this coincidence, and we may regard
it as raising to the highest degree of probability what was probable in
a lower degree before Dressel's discovery, — the use of our second
Gospel by the Clementine writer.
John. — The discovery whioh has helped us to such a degree of cer
tainty as regards the use of Mark, has largely increased the evidence
for the use of John. The slight allusions to the necessity of regenera
tion (Hom. XI. 26), and to Christ's words, " I am the door of the sheep,"
" My sheep hear my voice " (Hom. IIL 52), and the stiU more slight
aUusion to our Lord's language in John viii. 44 (Hom. III. 25), were,
previous to Dressel's discovery, barely sufficient to raise the use of the
fourth Gospel to the highest degree of probability. That evidence is
now supplemented by a direct and striking allusion to the man bhnd
from his birth (John ix. 1). The quotation of the disciple and the answer
of Jesus are quoted (Hom. XIX. 22) with slight variation and expansion.
The expression ek yEVEr^s is common to John and the Homilist ; el oSros
rjpaprev rj ol yovei? avrov ha rui^Xos yevvr]0-rj, corresponds to ris ^paprev,
oStos ^ ol yovei<s avrov, iva rui^Xos yewrjO-g of the Evangelist ; and iva St'
avrov (j)avepw6-fj rj Suva/its toC ®eov r^s dyvoia? lUipLevr/ ra dpapTT^para is just
such a variation of tva (jtavepuoO-ij to. Epya roC ©eov iv avriS as was required
by the Homilist's argument as to sins of ignorance in the context. 'Taken
in connection with slighter allusions, this allusion goes far to set the
question of the use of John's Gospel by the Clementine writer finally
at rest.
Apocryphal Gospel? — There are in the Clementine Homilies, as in
Justin, sayings attributed to Christ, and not to be found in our Gos
pels (Hom. IIL 50, 55 ; XIX. 20 ; and perhaps XIL 2). Credneri refers
tliese sayings to an apocryphal Gospel, which he takes to be the Gos
pel of Peter. Hilgenfeld^ thinks that Justin and the Clementine writer
used one and the same apocryphal Gospel. Uhlhorn's^ conclusion is,
that the use of an uncanonical Gospel document is proved, and that
the document is of a secondary character, probably from the stock of
the Gospel of the Hebrews. We can only say, as we have said of the
apocryphal allusions in Justin, that the Homilist may have got his sup
plementary sayings and details from oral tradition, or from those apocry
phal Gospels which contained it. The character of the writing gave
scope for the introduction of such traditional sayings of Jesus as might
still be passing from mouth to mouth, and the time of its composition
was in all probability the time when Christians were still partly de
pendent for acquaintance with the life and words of Jesus upon oral
teaching, and not yet entirely dependent upon written narratives.
1 .Beitrage, I. p. 831. = Krit. Unters., p. 388. ' Die Homilien, p. 137.

Ixviii INTEODUCTION.
Acts of the Apostles. — The Homilist (Hom. III. 53) puts into the
mouth of Jesus a claim to be the personal fulfilment of Deut. x-viii,
15, — a claim which Peter makes for Him, Acts iii. 22, and Stephen,
Acts vii. 37. It is doubtful whether this can be taken as a reference
to the book of Acts at all. It may be (as Credner suggests) based
upon John v. 46.
PauVs Epistles. — There are two passages in which there are apparent
allusions to Pauline Epistles, — Hom. XIX. 22 pointing to Gal. iv. 10 ;
Hom. XIX. 2 pointing to Eph. iv. 27. But the aUusions^are so indefin
ite as not to disturb the received opinion that the Clementine HomiUes
contain no references whatever to the Pauline Epistles. Indeed, the
nature of the writing is such as to exclude them. The -writer is
a Judseo-Christian opposed to Paul ; and Simon Magus, whom he intro
duces as Peter's opponent, is the Apostle of the Gentiles in disguise.

X.— GOSPEL OF THE HEBEEWS.
[See Text, pp. 451-463.)
Among the many problems of which we can only find a provisional or
probable solution, that of the Gospel of the Hebrews is undoubtedly
oue. Of late years, critics of the negative school have raised this book
to a position of primary importance, as the fountain from which aU our
Gospels flow. Hilgenfeld calls it the Archimedes-point which scholars
so long sought in the Gospel of Mark.^ But before we can so honour
it, we should need to know more about its characteristics and its his
tory. Its structure is a hypothesis, and any theory as to its origin
very nearly the same.
'The facts on which we have to exercise judgment are not many.
Complications arise from the apparent inconsistency of Jerome's state
ments with one another, and from the discrepancies between what is
quoted by him and what is quoted ' by Epiphanius as the account of
the Baptism in the Hebrew Gospel. ^
It is, however, an admitted fact that several books more or less akin
to St Matthew's Gospel — or one book resembling that Gospel — circu
lated largely among several sects of Jewish Christians in the early
centuries. How early those books (or that book) existed, and how
' Nov. Test. ex. Can. Rec, p. 13.
2 See and compare in the text Jerome and Epiphanius on Mat. iii. 14, &c.

GOSPEL OF THE HEBEEWS. Ixix
much change the copies underwent in the course of years, are matters of
dispute. It is easy to show that at the time when we hear most of
them by name, those books or copies did not agree with each other,
and that each one contained support for the special views of the sect
that used it. (See below on the Gospels of the Nazarenes, Ebionites,
and Egyptians. See in the text a note on the Gospel of Peter, which
may have been another recension of it.)
It is impossible to sketch even the outlines of the problem without
taking a hasty view of the sects among which the " Gospel of the
Hebrews" was found. The chief of these were the Nazarenes and
the Ebionites. A few words will indicate their characteristics.
The Nazarenes diverged least in doctrine from the ordinary catholic
type, of which Hegesippus speaks so strongly.^ The name was ori
ginally applied by the Jews to all Christians. Whatever the origin
of the word Nazarene,^ — whatever the difference in meaning between
Nazarene and Nazarite, Nazirite and Nazorite, in early usage,^ — we may
accept as a fact that a sect of Christians did claim from an early date
down to the fifth century to be followers of Christ in special affinity
with " James the Just," of whose character and death Eusebius has
preserved from Hegesippus so graphic an account.^ This very claim
of theirs intimates that, like James, they were consecrated to follow
Jesus as the Messiah ; and, like James, combined Christianity with
observance of many of the practices of Judaism. James, with all his
reverence for Judaism, was essentiaUy a Christian, and for his avowal
of his Christian faith lost his life. The Nazarenes, in short, were
Hebrew Christians, with strong abiding national peculiarities of faith
and ritual. They were chiefly found by the banks of the Jordan, in
Gilead and Bashan, and northwards towards Syria. They were not
" heretics ; " and there is no proof that they rejected aU the New Testa
ment save a Gospel of their own.* They did not reject St Paul as an
apostate, and in this they differed from most of the Jewish sects.^ In
deed, while they clung to many points of Judaism, they do not seem
to have sought to impose the doctrine or practice of the Law on other
Christians. The Ebionites originaUy were the Jewish Christians. As time went
on they became a sect, and, as Jerome says, were half Jew, half Chris-
' See Introduction on Hegesippus.
^ From "1V3 a shoot or sprout, or from "11J3 devoted or dedicated. See Kleuker,
Die Apokrypiien, p. 928, &c.; 118, 138; Fabricius, Cod. Apoc, p. 370.
' Both Hegesippus and Eusebius say that James was consecrated.
* The passages from Epiph. Haer. 29, 7-9, &c. (see text and notes, p. 456), do not
necessarily mean this ; and even though they did, would not settle the matter, as
Epiphanius apparently never saw the Naz.irene book.
" The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, which is supposed to be an utterance of
this sect, contains under the head of " Benjamin " a prediction of St Paul, as one
"who is to arise beloved of the Lord, listening to His voice, enlightening all the
Gentiles with new knowledge." See text, p. 446.

Ixx INTEODUCTION.
tian. Some say they were called after a founder, Ebion ; others that
their name means " poor," and that they were the descendants of the
impoverished Church of Jerusalem ; others that they bore the name of
"The Poor Men," because their intellect or thefr views were low
(Eus. H. E. III. 27). That the name was originally given to aU
Jewish Christians is seen in Eus. Onomasticon, sub voce x^^S where
we read " X"^^"- • ¦ ¦ ^^ V ^'¦'^^^^ 'E^paioi ol ek ILpiaTov Trto-rEu'trai/rEs
'EjSuovaioi KaXovp,evoi." (See Lipsius, Zur Quellen-Kritik des Epiphanies,
p. 123.) They recognised Christ as the Messiah, but refused to own
His divinity ; they rejected St Paul as an apostate ; and they clung to
what they called the Gospel of the Hebrews. The earlier Ebionites
regarded Christ as a mere man ; the later introduced the Gnostic idea
of an .^on coming down on Jesus at His baptism. The Ebionitism of
which we read in the earlier Fathers, as Irenseus and Hippolytus, was
of the first or Pharisaic form ; that of which Epiphanius tells is the
second or Essenic form.^ Their headquarters were by the banks of the
Jordan. It would be absurd to suppose that all of them were of one type,
but they were substantiaUy as described above.
Both Nazarenes and Ebionites used the Gospel of the Hebrews.
There can be no surprise in finding that this book resembled St Mat
thew more than the other canonical Gospels. St Matthew's Gospel in
its whole structure, and especially in its avowed relation to Old Tes
tament prophecy and Old Testament types, was intended primarily
for Hebrew Christians. There is, moreover, a widespread tradition in
the Church, to which many Fathers bear witness, that Matthew's book
was originally written in Hebrew. ^ It is a natural supposition that
the sects of Hebrew Christians would preserve the original text of
Matthew's Gospel in their native tongue. The book, however, as they
had it, is lost — we may say, hopelessly lost ; and we have only citations
from it, and descriptions of it by the early Fathers, to depend upon.
Clement of Alexandria and Origen, and above all Jerome, expressly
quote from it.^ Nay, Jerome, famous for his industry and his learning,
says, " There is a (Jospel which the Nazarenes and Ebionites use, which
1 lately translated from the Hebrew tongue into Greek, and which is
called by many the authentic Gospel of Matthew " (Comment, in Mat.
xii. 3*). From this there can be no doubt that it was a book which
differed so considerably from our canonical book as to need translation,
and to awaken controversy whether its form was the original one.
1 See Epiphanius, Haer. 30, 3. Epiphanius is the first to distinguish Ebionites
from Nazarenes as heretical sects.
2 See Irenaeus in Possini Catena Patrum, text, p. 129. Origen, Comment, in Joann.,
tom. iv. p. 132. Eus. H. E. III. 24 ; V. 10. Cyril Hieros. Catech., p. 148.
^ See text, p. 451, for references under "Gospel of the Hebrews : " see on Origen's
quotations, p. 137, note 2.
* See on this, Baur's Evangelien, p. 475 ; Roberts on the Gospels, p. 399.

GOSPEL OF THE HEBREWS. Ixxi
In another passage (written a.d. 392) he says : " Matthew, called
also Levi, who from a publican became an Apostle, first of aU composed
the Gospel of Christ in Hebreijo letters and words, in Judffia, for behoof
of those of the circumcision who had believed ; and it is not quite cer
tain who afterwards translated it into Greek. But the very Hebrew is
preserved to this day, in the Csesarean Library, which Pamphilus the
martyr with such care collected. I myself also was allowed the oppor
tunity of copying it [seeing and examining it ?] by the Nazarenes in
Beroea, who use this volume. In which it is to be observed that
throughout the Evangelist, when he uses the testimonies of the Old
Testament, either in his own person or in that of the Lord and Saviour,
does not follow the authority of the LXX. translators, but the Hebrew.
Of those the following are two examples : ' Out of Egypt have I called
my Son' — ii. 15 ; and, ' Since He shall be called a Nazarene' — iii. 23."^
That this is another book from that of which we have read in the
passage formerly quoted, is clear. The other he translated ; this one
he has seen and examined (for this is all we are entitled to make of
" facultas desoribendi fuit "). The other was a competitor with our St
Matthew for the honour of being the original ; this one is our St Mat
thew itself in its primary form in Hebrew. The former he had thought
it worth while to translate ; in the case of this one, he only needed to
compare it with our canonical book, so as to see that the quotations
which it makes from the Old Testament are from the original Old
Testament Hebrew, and do not correspond with the Greek of the LXX.
AU this seems clear enough. But unfortunately Jerome is not al
ways so distinct ; and it appears that in his old age he virtually, if
not explicitly, retracted the somewhat hasty opinion he had given,
that the book which the Nazarenes in Beroea used, and whioh was iden
tical with the original in Caesarea, was the very Gospel of Matthew in
Hebrew. Born a.d. 331, he died a.d. 420, at the age of 91, studying
and writing almost to the last, Hebrew being the study of his old age.
It was in a.d. 392 that he said the Nazarenes of Beroea had the genuine
original ; in later times, a.d. 410 to a.d. 415, he is more indefinite ;
and his last utterance on the subject, four or five years before his
death, is founded upon as a virtual retractation.^ His words are : " In
the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which was written indeed in the
Chaldee-Syriac language, but in Hebrew characters, which the Naz
arenes use as the Gospel according to the Apostles, or as the majority
think according to Matthew, which also is contained in the Library at
Csesarea, the narrative says," &c. He quotes from it some passages
whioh are not in our canonical Gospel. He also says, " That Gospel
which is caUed the Gospel of the Hebrews, which was lately translated
by me into Greek and Latin, and was used frequently by Origen."
1 De Vir. 111., c. 3. See text, p. 139.
' See Roberts, Discussions on the Gospels, p. 401, &c.

Ixxii INTRODUCTION.
There can be no doubt that difficulty arises from the fact that the
book which Jerome believed to be the very original of our St Matthew
was used by the Nazarenes in Beroea : while he speaks elsewhere as
though the other book (differing so much from our St Matthew that he
translated it) was used by aU the Nazarenes, as well as by the Ebionites,
— in short, that it was distinctive of those sects to use it. And it is
possible that, in his mature judgment, he meant to intimate that the book
which the Nazarenes used was not the original Matthew. But we must
remember, on the other hand, that the Nazarenes did not all necessar
ily use the same book. Those of Beroea ^ may, like their Macedonian
namesakes, have been honourably distinguished for inquiring into Scrip
ture, and so have retained a genuine copy, while the Nazarenes further
south by the banks of the Jordan may have had only an adulterated
one. And if we suppose that the Nazarenes did not aU use the same
book, though aU of them used a version of St Matthew more or less
like that we have, and written in Hebrew, or in a language which may
be popularly described as Hebrew, Jerome is not inconsistent with
himself in this part of the subject.
This supposition seems to meet the difficulties of the case so far.
To pursue the inquiry further would lead us into more remote
questions as to the original language of our canonical St Matthew. It
seems enough to say that the original existence of that book in Heb
rew, its translation into Greek by some one unknown, and the ultimate
disappearance of the genuine original, are aU possible enough separ
ately or together, and are really quite distinct from the matter of
fact as to what we leam of the composition of the Gospel of the Heb
rews when we first find it in trustworthy quotations. What we thus
learn enables us to see clearly that no critical Archimedes can find a
firm fulcrum in so shifting a substance. It rushes to and fro like
quicksilver. For, when we turn to the book which Nazarenes and
Ebionites are supposed to have used, we find that the Nazarene form
cannot have been the same as the Ebionite. When we try to lay hold
of the book which Jerome translated — as generally used by the Nazar
enes — we find (as we might expect) that its narratives are not iden
tical with those of our canonical Gospel, and that its form does not
seem to be the original which the other corrupts. When, therefore,
Jerome tells us that Nazarenes and Ebionites used that book, and
that many thought it the genuine St Matthew, he says what we can
not accept as a UteraUy accurate statement.
When we turn to the quotations in other Fathers — quotations prob
ably containing the more notable and quotable portions — -we find them
for the most part of small doctrinal importance, and not adding much
to our knowledge of facts, but nevertheless interesting, and quite un
like the useless dilutions of the " Apocryphal Gospels."
' A town in Syria — perhaps Aleppo.

GOSPEL OF THE HEBREWS. Ixxiil
The words, " I am not a bodiless phantom," ascribed to our Lord, are
not very different from those in the New Testament. These others,
" He that hath wondered shall rule, and he that hath ruled shaU have
rest," contain Christian philosophy in Gnostic phrase. And others
might be similarly used as illustrations.
We have ordinary traditional variation in the rich man " scratching
his head;"^ we have also an interesting traditional application of our
Lord's words, when the rich man in the narrative already alluded to
is asked how he can be said to love his neighbour — for while his house
is full of good things, nothing goes out from it to relieve the squalor
and the hunger and the poverty among the children of Abraham
around his door.
But we have distinct doctrinal purpose, obviously of a Gnostic type,
in a number of other passages peculiar to this Gospel. We read that
the reply of Jesus to His mother and brethren, when they pressed Him
to go with them to be baptised of John unto the remission of sins,
was, " What sin have I done that I should go and be baptised of Him ?
Unless it be that this very thing which I have said is ignorance." In
this we have an obvious attempt to account for our Lord accepting bap
tism at the hands of His forerunner without applying the simpler and
grander teaching of the canonical narrative, that " thus it became Him
to fulfil all righteousness." We see the same Gnostic tendencies at
work in the sequel of the Nazarene narrative of the baptism: "When
the Lord had gone up out of the water, the whole fountain of the Holy
Spirit descended upon Him, and rested on Him, and said to Him,
' My Son, in all the prophets I waited for Thy coming, that I might
rest in Thee : for Thou art my rest : Thou art my first-bom Son, who
reignest for ever.' " . This must be taken in connection with the pas
sages in which the Holy Spirit is caUed the Mother of Jesus, — passages
which startled both Origen and Jerome in their day ; and, as we have
seen in the notes to our text, led on from the early heresies of the
Gnostics into the Mariolatry of the later Christian Church.
We have on the other hand an interesting addition to the Canonical
narrative, and a probable explanation of a passage of St Paul, when we
find in this Gospel the story of our Lord's appearance to James the
Just after His resurrection.
It is scarcely possible that any one who reads the passages preserved
from this long-lost Gospel wiU believe that they are an earlier form of
sacred narrative than the canonical St Matthew. They have every
mark of being a gradually altered recension of the original work
which is in the New Testament.
1 Also in the man with a withered hand saying that he was a mason ; and in the
statement that a lintel of prodigious size fell in, instead of the canonical narrative
that the veil of the temple was rent ; and in the well-known addition to the narra
tive of the baptism, that fire blazed on the Jordan.

Ixxiv INTRODUCTION.

The Ebionite Gospel.
As we have seen, Jerome seems to have thought that the Nazarenes
and Ebionites used the same book. His quotations are from the
Nazarene form. Epiphanius, not nearly so trustworthy in matters of
opinion, but worthy of credit in such matters of fact as long verbal
quotations, uses the Ebionite form. We have, therefore, no means of
comparing the two sets of quotations, save where they chance to
describe the same event. The one being in Latin and the other in
Greek, verbal correspondence is scarcely ascertainable ; but still we
are able to see that, in such a case as the narrative of the baptism of
Jesus, the two books cannot have been the same. I have already
quoted the Nazarene narrative, and it is enough here to refer for com
parison to the long Ebionite extract at p. 457 of our text. The varia
tions are not greater than those found in different manuscripts of such
apocryphal books as the Gospel of the Infancy, but they are incon
sistent with the theory that we now possess (or can be sure that any
one ever possessed) in the Gospel of the Hebrews the original record
of the life of Jesus Christ.
In the text will be found a remarkable passage from Epiphanius,
intimating that the Gospel used by the Ebionites professed to be
written by the twelve apostles in a body, although the names of only
eight are given.
Without further detail we may say that the passages from Epiphanius,
if they are accepted, are to the effect that —
1. Matthew's Gospel was in use among the Ebionites,^ but mutilated
by the excision of the genealogies, and of the first two chapters as a
whole.^ 2. The Ebionites said that Jesus Christ was not God's Son, but as
one of the Archangels, though the chief of them. They supposed that
" Christ " came at baptism upon tlie man Jesus : and they believed
Him a Saviour, to be not mere man, but to have had no father or
mother or brethren, in the ordinary sense. They quoted, " These
are my brethren, and my mother, who do the will of my Father."
3. Although Jews, they ceased to offer sacrifice ; ® they practised
circumcision as being from the patriarchs, and as being sanctioned by
Christ's example.
1 See Irenseus, B. I. 26, 2, and B. IIL 12, 7.
' Epiphanius, Haer. 30, 18 ^comp. 29, 9).
^ In support of this they quoted as words of Jesus, " I came to abolish sacrifices ;
and if ye do not cease to sacrifice, wrath will not cease from you."

GOSPEL OF THE HEBEEWS. IxXV

Conclusions as to the Gospel of the Hebrews.
In conclusion, we have had ample proof that some book, professing
to be a consecutive account of our Lord's life, was widely circulated
among the Jewish Christians, and that this book resembled the
canonical St Matthew. We find that it had various names, — that
it was the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Nazarene Gospel, the Ebionite
Gospel, when described by the name of those who used it ; that it was
the Gospel of the Twelve, the original St Matthew, when its name was
drawn from something in itself.
If we are asked where we have the original form of this book, in the
few cases where we can compare different quotations, we must answer
that we cannot tell. Its various forms differ considerably from each
other, but we have not the means of deciding as to its earliest form.
When we have sects so like and yet so unlike as were the Nazarenes
and the Ebionites, we might expect that they would adopt the same
book at first, and afterwards (probably gradually) modify it to suit
themselves. The Ebionite alterations are mainly dogmatical or doc
trinal ; the Nazarene are chiefly, though not entirely, traditional sup
plements to the canonical narratives.
We have already found reason to accept the substantial accuracy of
Jerome's words, and have come to the conclusion that the book for
. which describendi facultas was granted to him by the Nazarenes of
Beroea was not the same as that which he translated ; — that the former
was our St Matthew in Hebrew ; that the latter was St Matthew, adul
terated during successive generations. We believe it to be probable
that the Beroean book was only used by a portion of the sect of the
Nazarenes, and the other by the Nazarenes and the Ebionites as a whole.
Whether Jerome was right in supposing that the book he saw in
Beroea was a Hebrew form of St Matthew, and that the book in the
Csesarean Library was another of the same, there can be no good reason
for doubting that he who spent his learned old age in Bethlehem knew
very well whether the book he translated was substantially the Gospel
used by the Nazarenes and the Ebionites in his neighbourhood. There
is no reason, from anything that he has said, to regard that book as a
serious competitor for the honour of priority with our canonical Gospel.
But a word may now be said here as to its relation to the original
form of St Matthew. The conclusion to which I at present incline
is only given as the most probable, not as certain. Without en
tering on the vexed question of the original language of St Mat
thew, I must say that the current of antiquity mns strongly in
favour of its having been Hebrew. But if this were proved to be a
mistake of the ancients,^ the book itself would show that it was at least
' See Roberts's Discussions, p. 396.

lxxvi INTRODUCTION.
written for the Hebrews ; and therefore we must believe that a Hebrew
translation of the Gospel was made at a very early period for the benefit
of those who were ignorant of the original Greek, or whose national
susceptibilities led them to prefer their national tongue. In any case,
we conclude that there was almost at the first a Hebrew form of St
Matthew's Gospel. This was naturaUy the book favoured by Jewish
Christians, whether orthodox or heretical ; and this, therefore, became
the standard of the Nazarenes and the Ebionites. The former, though
cherishing it as specially their own, nevertheless graduaUy introduced
into it, perhaps from the margin, such supplementary traditions as that
the man whose hand was withered had been a mason. The latter,
gradually drawing more apart from other communities, whether Jewish
or Christian, continued to adapt their Gospel to their changing tenets,
introducing such sayings as that which abolished sacrifice, or such
narratives as that which gave the sanction of the Lord and aU His
apostles to their book.
The Gospel of the Egyptians [seep. 468)
Was full of parables, aUegories, and mysticism, and may be here men
tioned because of the agreement of its views with those of another
Hebrew sect or organisation, the Essenes. Its title denotes that it was
current among the Egyptians, and its mystic teachings confirm the
claim of the title. It is not mentioned by Eusebius in his Eccl. Hist.,
nor is it in the decree of Gelasius. It is mentioned by Origen.^ It is
used also by the author of the so-called " Second Epistle of Clement,"
and by Clement of Alexandria, but in his case so as to distinguish it
from the four Gospels handed down to us.
It is written with the manifest aim of maintaining the merit of
celibacy, and of showing the evils wrought in the world by the female
sex. In this respect the book corresponds to the tenets of the Essenes ;
and if there were Essenic Christians with a special " Gospel," this book
would exactly meet their case. There is difficulty, however, in con
necting the Essenes with the locality of Egypt. It is probable that
they adopted some of the philosophy of Egyptian Judaism (see Geikie's
' Life of Christ,' i. 363), but their views of the material universe, and
their central doctrines generally, were Zoroastrian (Lightfoot, Colos
sians, p. 149), and as an organisation they were found by the shores of
the Dead Sea. They are not likely to have had local connection with
the "Gospel ofthe Egyptians." Eusebius (H. E. II. 17) identifies the
Therapeutffi of Egypt with early Christians, but his argument (which is
a commentary upon Philo De Vit. Contempl.) is not now generaUy
' As an attempt of the kind mentioned in St Luke's preface, and as therefore dis
tinguished from the four Gospels, which their authors did not aitempt to take in hand
to make, but which were the result of their being moved by the Holy Ghost See
p. 82.

HEGESIPPUS. Ixxvii
accepted. Many writers, founding on Philo and Josephus (BeU. Jud.
IL 8), identify the Essenes with Christian monks originating in
Egypt. This opinion also is not now accepted; but is still not un
worthy of consideration. About the Essenes there is little certain.
They were originally Jews ; and though many of them became Chris
tians after the fall of Jerusalem, they would by so doing cease to be
Essenes. That such men would relish, perhaps fabricate, the mystic
Gospel is highly probable. But we cannot go further. We may say
that the tendency to asceticism whioh originated the Therapeutse in
Egypt, and the Essenes in Syria, acted upon Christendom also ;i and
that it was to be expected that Egypt, the cradle of Christian mon-
asticism, should give a name to the new " Gospel."

XL— HEGESIPPUS.

Lightfoot's essay on the silence of Eusebius (' Contemporary Eeview,'
1875, p. 169) is one of the most important contributions to historical
criticism which have been made in our generation. In the case of
Hegesippus it has special value, and enables us to understand clearly
what formerly was not only obscure but inconsistent with itself. Euse
bius, from whom we have almost all we know of him, says that he
quoted from the Gospel according to the Hebrews ; and yet in the
pages of Eusebius himself are indirect proofs that his quotations were
not limited to it. This seemed contradictory, and certainly led many
critics into contradictions of fact. But we now learn from Lightfoot's
careful and conclusive induction that Eusebius only laid himself out to
record or refer to the quotations of ancient authors when the book from
which they quoted was one in dispute, and that his silence upon the
subject of citations from a particular book is an indication that the book
was not disputed. When therefore the author of ' Supernatural Eeli
gion ' says of Eus. H. E. IV. 22, that " Eusebius shows that he has
sought, and here details, all the sources from which Hegesippus quotes,
or regarding which he expresses opinions," ^ the statement is the reverse
of fact, though not unnatural up to the time of Lightfoot's remarkable
essay. That the ancient historian enriched his pages with passages
from the Gospel of the Hebrews and from unwritten Jewish tradition,
is quite compatible with his habitually using the canonical books.
'The position of Hegesippus in our inquiry is no longer difficult to
1 See Ellicott, Cambridge Essays, 1856, p. 169 ; Nicholson's Gospel of the Heb
rews. ¦^ Sup. ReL,vol. i. p. 433.

lxxviii INTEODUCTION.
define ; and although his testimony is neither full nor explicit, it is
quite in accordance with what we have learned from other witnesses.
He was in Eome some time between a.d. 157 and a.d. 168, and his
history did not leave his hands until after a.d. 177.^ He was renowned
as a champion of Christianity against its assailants, — to be counted in
deed among the foremost, as Eusebius tells us, after a most eloquent
chapter on the triumphs of the Gospel over heathenism and heresy and
false philosophy.^ Among his writings was a faithful history of the
apostolic teaching [drrXav^ rrapdSoa-iv roS ctTroo-roXtKoC Krjp-uyp.aTO'i), unfor
tunately lost, save that some fragments are preserved by Eusebius.
He travelled in many lands, had intercourse with many bishops, and
found everywhere the same doctrine in the Church of Christ — a doc
trine proclaimed by " the law and the prophets and the Lord." ^ He
stayed for some time at Corinth ; and there is significance in his avowal
that the Church of Corinth continued in the true faith, and that he and
the Church in that place were refreshed with each other's sound doc
trine. It is strange that any one can write of this Hegesippus as hold
ing only by Hebrew Scriptures and Hebrao-Christian Gospels, when
his own distinct stateinent is that the one doctrine which he found
everywhere was speciaUy refreshing to him in the Church of Corinth,
which is well known to have been so Pauline. It is not correct to say
that Eusebius says, " The Gospel which he used in his -writings was
that ' according to the Hebrews ; '" * because Eusebius only says that
in his many writings this ancient historian took certain things [tlvo.
Tidrja-iv) from the Hebrew and Syriac Gospel (or Gospels), and from
Hebrew tradition, as it was natural for one born a Jew to do.^ And it
is worthy of notice, also, that he was no indiscriminate admirer of
extra-canonical books, for he took pains to decide upon the claims of
the apocryphal writings, and records his conclusion that some of them
were forged in his own time by heretics.
' He says he was in Rome while Anicetus was bishop ; aud he intimates that Eleu-
theros was bishop when he closes his record. Anicetus succeeded in a.d. 157, and
Eleutheros in A.D. 177. The Alexandrian Chronicle says he died in the time of
Comraodus (who began to reign A.D. 192).
2 Eusebius (H. E. IV. 7, 8, and again IV. 22) names him in the same list with
Dionysius of Corinth and Irenaeus, as the chief of those to whom we owe it that the
orthodoxy of the sound faith which comes from the Apostles has been transmitted in
writing (" Siv koI els iipas rris diroffToAiK^s irapaS6(Teas rt rrfs vyiovs itiareas eyypaipos
KarrjXBev opBoSo^ia").
' Eus. H. E. IV. 22. He says: " 'Ev eKdarrt Se StaSoxf, Kal iv eKdo-rij viXet
oSrus ?x^' ^^ ^ vSpos KTfpvTTet Kal at irpo(prjrat Kal & KiSpios."
* Sup. Rei. , vol. i. p. 433. In another passage (vol. i. p. 421) the author makes still
bolder assertions regarding Hegesippus. "The evidence of this ' ancient and apostolic
man ' is very important ; and although he evidently attaches great value to tradition,
knew of no canonical Scriptures of the New Testament, and, like Justin, rejected the
Apostle Paul, he still regarded the Gospel according to the Hebrews with respect,
and made use of no other."
5 In this same connection Eusebius says Hegesippus put a high value on the apoc
ryphal Wisdom of Solomon.

MUEATOEIAN CANON. Ixxix
The passages in which the fragments of Hegesippus's writings
suggest canonical books wiU be found in our text. We need only
say here that he alludes to Herod's terror at Christ's birth, which is
found in Mat. ii., aud (as we learn from Epiphanius, Hser. 30, 13)
this chapter of Matthew was one of those omitted in the Gospel of the
Hebrews. In his memorable description of the death of the strange
ascetic, James the Just (Eus. H. E. II. 23), we find an echo of Mat.
xxvi. 64,^ when he speaks of the Son of man on the right hand of the
mighty power, and about to come on the clouds of heaven. We find
the very words of our Lord's praj^er on the cross (Luke xxiii. 34) in
the last cry of James, " Father, forgive them (a<^£s airots), for they
know not what they do." If later chroniclers report him rightly, he ob
jects to Gnostic renderings of " Eye hath not seen," &c., and cites the
words of our Lord, " Blessed are your eyes, for they see," &c. (Mat.
xiii. 16; Luke x. 23); and not only so, but refers to our Gospels as
^etai ypat^ai.^
It may even be that he alludes to John's Gospel, when, in his ac
count of James's death, he says the crowd asked the saint what is the
door of Jesus.* He seems to allude to Luke xix. 11 when recording
Domitian's inquiry regarding Christ's kingdom ; and to 2 Tim. iv. 1
when he gives the answer that Christ would come in glory to judge
the quick and the dead, and render unto every man according to his
works.* He weaves the words of the pastoral epistles into his narrative
when speaking of the way in which heretics dared to hold up their
heads after the Apostles passed away. See Eus. H. E. III. 32.^

XIL— MUEATOEIAN CANOls.
MuRATORi, in the third vol. of ' Antiquitates ItaUcffi Medii ^vi ' (1740),
published a MS, at that time in the Ambrosian Library in Milan, for
merly in the monastery of Bobbio. His object was to show that
some men employed in old times to copy MSS were singularly un
learned and unskilled ; but he was also aware that the MS was valuable
because of its. connection with the canon of the New Testament. The
MS contained various fragments. It seems to have been the common-
1 Cf. Mat. chiefly ; but see also Mark and Luke. ^
2 His words, " From these arose false Christs, false prophets, false apostles, ' re
semble Mat. xxiv. 24 more than the Clementine version. See p. 125, note 1.
3 Eus H. E II. 23. The answer is, that "He was the Saviour."
• Eus. H. E. nL19, 20. .a , „ • ,,
° It is not certain that Eusebius uses the very words of Hegesippus, but we may
suppose that the statement is reported pretty much as he made it.

Ixxx INTEODUCTION.
place-book of a monk, apparently of the eighth century. Muratori's
own conjecture (generally approved by subsequent writers) was, " (Mjus
antiquitas pwne ad annos mille accedere mihi visa est." ^
Amongst other things in the MS was a fragment on the canon be
ginning in the middle of a sentence, and breaking off abruptly. From
the reference to Hermas as " having written the ' Shepherd ' very re
cently and in our own times, while Pius, his brother, was bishop of
Eome," Muratori supposed Caius, a weU-known presbyter of Eome, to be
the author of this fragment on the canon, and fixed the date at a.d.
196. As regards the date, this is a mistake, for Pius died about the
middle of the second century. If the words " very recently and in our
own times " be true, and have their natural meaning, the date of the
original ofthe fragment is probably a.d. 160 or 170. Intemal evidence
seems on the whole to confirm this conclusion. There is nothing to
identify the author. But the testimony is valuable as being early. It
is evidently a very illiterate transcript, and the transcriber appears to
have had before him a badly done translation of a Greek account ofthe
canon.^ The conjectures and controversies of scholars may be summed
up in the words of Tregelles, whose careful edition is the basis of the
text in this work : "Its evidence is not the less trustworthy from its
being a blundering and illiterate transcript of a rough and rustic trans
lation of a Greek original." *
But while admitting this, we may be permitted to wonder at the
unanimity with which so many scholars of all shades of opinion accept
this anonymous fragment as genuine, though there is little warrant for
its date save its own claim, and everything about it is so incomplete.*
It seems to be compiled from dislocated pieces ; at all events, the con
nection between the sentences is often obscure. The only use which
can be safely made of its testimony regarding some disputed point is
of a general kind. Those who hunt for minute details in it have to
read them into it, and then, by dint of corrections, they find them in
the adjusted text (see on this Eeuss, Gesch., § 310). It testifies be-
1 The convent of Bobbio was founded in the beginning of the seventh century by
Columban, au Irish (Scottish) monk. It is probable that the original MS was brought
to Europe from Africa during the persecution by the Vandals in the fifth century, or
owing to the spread of Islamism iu the seventh. Some of the active monks of Bob
bio made the extract (or transcript) and translation which remains, while the original
is lost. See Credner, Gesch., § 78.
2 There have been several attempts to reconstruct the Greek. See one in Hile-
Einl., p. 97. ^'
3 Treg. Can. Mur., p. 10. Hesse believes it to be in its original African Latin
(Das Muratorische Fragment, p. 39).
* See Volkmar's elaborate treatise denying even the corruptness of the text (Volk-
mar's Credner's Gesch. des N. T. Kanon, § 164, &c.) He ascribes to it a Romish
origin about A.D. 190-200. See an able argument against the ordinary opinion in
Donaldson's Hist, of Christ. Lit., vol. iii. p. 203, &c. Dr Donaldson regards the
fragraent as of Latin (probably African) origin, " towards the end of the flrst half of
the third century."

CLEMENT OP ALEXANDRIA. Ixxxi
yond all doubt to two Gospels, and, by fair inference, we get its testi
mony to the other two. It testifies also to thirteen epistles of St Paul ;
to the Acts of the Apostles as Luke's ; to at least two epistles (per
haps three) of John ; and to Jude's epistle, and to the Apocalypse of
John.i The epistles of James and Peter are not mentioned, and there
is no certain reference to Hebrews.^ On the other hand, a " Book of
Wisdom " is named with acceptance in a perplexing way ; and an Apoc
alypse of Peter is accepted by the author, though (Uke John's) not
approved of by aU for reading in church. Two forged epistles (to
Laodiceans and Alexandrians) are named only to be denounced. Her
mas is admitted to private, but not to pubUc, use. Others of the many
claimants to recognition in the early Church are named, or obscurely
alluded to.*
On the whole, we must regard this famous fragment as an unsatis
factory document. If the original be discovered some day, and in its
light the multifarious literature of the subject be read, we shall pro
bably have an even more amusing proof of the futility of conjectures
than is furnished by the recent publication of the lost parts of the
*' Epistles of Clement."

XIIL— CLEMENT OP ALEXANDEIA.
Titus Flavius Clemens, by birth an Athenian or Alexandrian, originally
,a pagan, — a man who saw many lands and studied many subjects, — suc
ceeded Pantsenus as head of the catechetical school of Alexandria about
A.D. 189, and died about thirty years later. He was the teacher of
Origen, probably of Hippolytus. His ecclesiastical rank was that of
presbyter. Three of his works which remain are a series — (1) An
^ See for this the allusion to the letters to the seven churches, rather than the
reference to John's along with Peter's Apocalypse.
^ Bunsen conjectures that the allusion to the book written by the friends of Solo
mon refers to the parallel case of the Epistle to the Hebrews as written by a com
panion of Paul. Others find " Hebrews " in the Epistle to the Alexandrians. See
text and notes.
' To the text, which follows Tregelles, may be here added the conclusion as in
Hesse, beginning at line 2 of page 8 in our print — " . . . . et ideo legi eum qui
dem oportet, se publicare vero in ecclesia neque inter prophetas completo numero neque
inter apostolos in finem temporum potest. . . . Arsinoi autem seu Valentini vel
Mitiadis nihil in totum recipim-m. quin etiam novum psalmorum librum Marcioni
conscripserunt. Una cum Basilide Asianum Catafrygum constitutorem [rejicimus\'^
Following Van Gilse, he reads "semota passio" at our note 12 of p. 6. In these
are his most important changes. In our text a coraraa is omitted after fuit on line
10 of p. 6. /

Ixxxii INTRODUCTION.
Exhortation to the Heathen ; (2) The Instructor (TatSaywyos), being an
Exposition of Christ's Character and Precepts, for the benefit of those
who have been converted to Christianity ; (3) crrpajyitara or orpM/yiarEts
(Miscellanies), a collection of notes on the higher Christian yvtSo-ts, in
tended to delineate the perfect Christian. There is also a small tract,
"Who is the rich man that shall be saved?" He divided the Chris
tian books into " the Gospel " and " the Apostle," — a division which
Origen, after him, adopted. He acknowledged four Gospels, fourteen
of St Paul (Philemon, indeed, is not quoted). He ascribes the Acts to
Luke ; quotes 1 and 2 John, 1 Peter, Jude, and the Apocalypse. Of
James, 2 Peter, and 3 John we have no recognition. He ascribes
Hebrews to Paul, and the Apocalypse to John.
His views of extra- canonical books are tho chief difficulty. He
uses ecclesiastical writings, especially Barnabas, Clement of Eome,
and Hermas ; also apocryphal books, such as the Preaching of Peter
(much used by Valentinus, Marcion, and Basilides), the. Sibylline Or
acles, the Eevelation of Peter, the Traditions of Matthias, and the Gos
pel according to the Egyptians. Sometimes he seems to regard them
as historical authorities ; sometimes he quotes them by way of illustra
tion, sometimes (Sibylline Oracles) as divinely inspired, and as pro
phecy. In trying to understand his position, we have to remember
that he was, and gloried in being, an eclectic in everything. He was a
Christian litterateur rather than a theologian, a metaphysician rather
than a logician. When he quotes books he is not thereby asserting
their canonicity. It was one of his accusations against heretics that
they did not obey the Divine Scriptures, and kicked off the tradition
of the Church. There is no proof that he regarded the book called
" Peter's Preaching " as Peter's own composition ; and though he quotes
the Gospel of the Egyptians, he does not own it as Scripture, or even
as authentic. The SibyUine Oracles he did indeed over-estimate, and
this is a peculiarity of Clement wherein he did not agree with the gen
eral testimony of the Church.'- The apocryphal books were for the
most part written in his own Greek tongue, and were launched in the
society amid which his busy life was spent, so that it is easy to under
stand how different was his estimate of them from that which Tertullian
found in the Latin Church, outside of all the movement which they
represented. Clement's view of yvuo-ts, as acquaintance with the higher meaning
of Scripture, claims also notice here. He believed that " a true tradi-
1 Justin quotes the Sibyl twice (Apol. I. 20, 44) along with Hystaspes, {not " as
the Word of God," Sup. Rei., vol. ii. p. 168, but) as he quotes ih the same chapters the
Stoics, Plato, Menander, as authorities with some, and as illustrations. But Clement
goes much further. He calls the Roman Clement " Apostle " (Strom. IV. 17, p. 610) ;
he calls Barnabas "Apostle" (Strom. II. 6, p. 444, &c.), and "the apostolic"
(Strom. II. 20, p. 489).

ORIGEN. Ixxxiii
tion of the blessed doctrine " was imparted by Christ to the chief Apos
tles, and by them handed down to their successors in the Church ; and
he claimed to have received it through Panteenus. This yvwo-ts led to
much mysticism, but it also, in Clement's case, was the core of excel
lent exposition of faith and virtue. It was not contrary to Scripture,
not even supplementary to it, but a key to it. " They wlio are labour
ing after excellence will not stop in their search for truth until they
receive proof from the Scriptures themselves." His mle of faith is the
agreement of the Church, the apostles, aud prophets. But he appeals
less to the objective authority of tradition than TertulUan and Irenseus.
His view was, that the Apostles possessed completely what other be
Uevers receive partially. He stiU built aU upon Scripture, the wise
master-builder being the instructed (Gnostic) Christian teacher. In
our text (from Eus. H. E. VL 14,— see below under "Gospels ") he speaks
of the four Gospels as standing by themselves. And whatever his
8iriY^a-eis were to which Eusebius (H. E. VI. 14) refers, the only non-
canonical books to which they were attached are Barnabas and the
Apocalypse of Peter. He wrote on aU the dvTiXey6pi.evai ypa^ai, but (as
Lardner says) so did Le Clero.

XIV.— OEIGEN.
Origen, born a.d. 184, was the " father of Biblical Criticism." He was
from his childhood devoted to the study of the Scriptures ; and, under
much privation — partly brought on him by others, and partly self-caused
— he kept the one end before him, with such success that he stands by
himself as the greatest and most laborious critic of antiquity. His
achievements and his methods of working have powerful influence
even to the present day.'^ He was a ptipil of Clement, and was head of
the catechetical school of Alexandria from the time he was eighteen
years of age until he was upwards of forty ; thereafter he lived in Csesarea.
He was not always stationary, but at various times made journeys to
Athens, Arabia, &c., teaching doctrine and criticism. On one of his
journeys he was ordained presbyter in Csesarea, and (probably on that
account) lost the favour of the bishop of Alexandria, by whose council
he was deprived of his post as teacher, and of his rank as presbyter.^
1 See Reuss, Gesch., § 511, &c.
^ It might be alleged that his ordination gave just offence, — first, because he belonged
to another diocese ; and second, because he had (in unhappy misintei-pretation of a
saying of our Lord's) mutilated hiraself. His works, already published, might expose
him to the charge of heresy. Jealousy, however, seems to have had much to do with

Ixxxiv INTRODUCTION.
But although he was accused of heresy by his enemies, the Churches
of Palestine, Arabia, and Achaia retained their reverence for him. He
suffered great hardships in the Decian persecution (a.d. 250), and died
in Tyre about A.D. 253.
He -wrote on every book of Scripture — notes, commentaries, or homi
lies, — 5000 volumes iu aU, say some ; more than any other man can
read, says Jerome, not unnaturally.' Most of his works are lost. Some
of them survive in an unsatisfactory Latin translation by Eufinus, or in
renderings by Jerome ; but his great work against Celsus is complete,
and is a memorable record of an early struggle between the assailant
and the defender of Christianity. They were well matched in ability—
Celsus exceUing in general information, while Origen was a master of
criticism. The extracts given in the foUowing pages give a fair idea
of the chief points of the controversy.^ The most laborious of aU his
undertakings was his collation of the versions of the Old Testament,
known as his Hexapla and Tetrapla. A work with parallel columns
in such elaborate fashion was not likely to be multiplied, and it has
been lost, except some fragments.
On the whole, we find from Eusebius's elaborate statement that Ori
gen received the four Gospels, the Acts, 13 Epp. of Paul, and Hebrews
(whether Paul's or not), 1 Peter, 1 John, and the Apocalypse (which he
regarded as the writing of John the Apostle). While his opinions are
thus far certain, there is doubt as to the other books. James and Jude
are not mentioned at all ; and 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John are mentioned,
but said to be of disputed genuineness. If, however, we accept the
translations of his Homilies on Genesis and Joshua, we find that, when
speaking popularly, he treated James and Jude as integral parts of the
New Testament ; that 2 Peter and " the epistles " of John occupy the
same rank ; and that he ascribed fourteen epistles to St Paul.^
There is a passage in one of Origen's Commentaries in which he
seems to make a threefold classification of sacred books.* He is speak
ing of the K-qpvypa TLerpov, and says, " E^ETa^ovrEs rrepl rov /Si^Xiov rrorepov
TTOTE yvi^criov ea-nv 17 voBov rj piKTov." The specialties of the book under
his consideration made the inquiry as to its being genuine or spurious, or
part of both, only natural. It does not appear that Origen proceeded
upon such a classification in other cases. Elsewhere ^ he states with-
Dionysius's proceedings. See Hefele, Hist, of Councils, p. 87. On the true render
ing of Mat. xix. 12, see Origen, Hom. iu Mat., tom. xv. p. 651 (Migne, vol. iii. p.
1253). 1 See on his seven shorthand writers, his book-writers, and the girls who wrote the
fair copies, Eus. H. E. VI. 28.
" See a lively account of Celsus's work by J. A. Froude, ' Fraser's Magazine,' Feb.
1878. ' See under "New Testament as a whole," p. 51.
* See Reuss, Gesch., § 311, for an elaborate commentary upon it. See also Cred-
ren, Gesch., § 87.
" De Princ. Praef. , vol. viii. p. 49.

THE PASCHAL CONTROVERSY. Ixxxv
out qtialification that the Prcedicatio Petri is an ecclesiastical book, not
written by Peter or by any one else divinely inspired.
Origen, as a public speaker and teacher, was well versed in current
literature, and both recognised and praised Christian books whioh are
not included in the canon. But he wrote no commentary on any book
not in our present canon. He mentions the Gospel of the Hebrews,
but with a half apology for using its narrative ; the Gospels of Peter
and of James he mentions as containing a tradition ; and he cites a
phrase from the Acts of Paul. He calls " Bamabas " a Catholic Epistle ;
and in one passage (Latin) has it with "sicut in multis Scripturis
invenimus." He mentions with favour the Epistle of Clement. His
opinion of Hermas is " quce Scriptura valde mihi utilis videtur et ut puto
divinitus inspirata ; " but he elsewhere says that, though widely cir
culated, it is not accepted by all. Origen did not confine inspiration
to canonical books : his generous spirit recognised aU truth as from
God, without tlierefore admitting that its expression is authoritative.

XV.— THE PASCHAL CONTEOVEESY.
There are few controversies which have made so great a noise as that
which is called the Paschal Controversy. It was a subject of consider
able interest in the second century and thereafter ; but it became one
of engrossing importance in the second and third quarters of the nine
teenth ceutury. The peculiarity of the revived interest is, that it did
not content itself with the same range as that within which the first
excitement was confined.
The Asiatic Christians of the second century were at issue with the rest
of Christendom as to the proper day for closing the fast which preceded the
observance of Easter. That was the subject of the original Paschal
Controversy.'^ The Tiibingen scholars of the nineteenth century
endeavoured to make the controversy affect the genuineness of the
Gospel of John. The controversialists of the early Church never once
beUeved or imagined that the genuineness of John's Gospel was at
stake during their dispute. Nay, it appears in the records of the con
troversy that the Gospel was admitted about a.d. 170. And it can be
1 See text, p. 189, where Eusebius says the Asiatics " creX-nvris tV TEo-iropeirKai-
SfKdrnv (JiocTO Se7v iirl t^s tou aarripiov itdaxa eoprris irapa(pvXdTreiv . . . rhtS rav
dnnav imXi(reis iroie'!(rBai ;" while the other Churches had another custom derived
from apostolic tradition,— " is fiJ; Se ereptf irporr-ltKeiv irapi. rV t^s dvaard(reas rov
Starripos ijpav rjpepav rets vi\(rrelas eiriX6e(TBat."

Ixxxvi INTRODUCTION.
proved from other evidence (see our text, p. 167, &c.) that it was admit
ted long before.
The attempt of Baur and his followers is to show that in Asia Minor,
where John lived and died, his authority was quoted iu favour of the
commemoration of Christ's last supper ' with His disciples on the 14th
Nisan, — a day when, according to his Gospel, the supper could not take
place, because the Gospel represents Him as dying on that day. In
other words, say Baur and his followers, the actual oral testimony of
John was that Christ died on the day when the Synoptists say He died,
the 15th ; but the testimony of the Gospel falsely ascribed to him is
that Christ died the day before.
It would be easy to dwell on several peculiarities of this controversy
even as now stated. It is natural, for example, to remark on the
assumption that the traditional story is correct, and that the fourth
Gospel is the pretender ; whereas one might easily hold by the other
view, that the local controversialists misinterpreted the Apostle's prac
tice, and that his real opinion must be leamed from his book. It is
natural also to say that there is grave doubt whether discrepancy really
exists between John and the Synoptists, and that, in point of fact,
there is no such discrepancy ; ^ so that no argument from its existence
can be brought against the genuineness of the fourth Gospel. We
might almost protest against the assumption that the 14th was origi
nally kept in Asia Minor as the day of Christ's partaking of the Pass
over, for it was really kept as the day of the Jewish Passover. Nor is
it easy to refrain from remarking that so grave questions as the truth
fulness and authorship of the fourth Gospel are not fairly solved by
mere inferences from fragmentary notices of an obscure controversy.
But we need not tarry on the threshold. It will appear, when we
have concluded the inqufry on which we are about to enter, that the
controversy did not refer to the day of the Saviour's death, but to the
proper day of closing a fast.* It wiU appear that whether or not the
aged Apostle sanctioned a particular observance on a particular day, as
was alleged in Ephesus half a century after his death, the fact of such
1 The words quoted in last note, "iirl rijs rov (rariiplov ird<Txa eoprijs,'' are the
strong point of this position, in so far as Eusebius is concerned.
2 It seems to me that Wieseler (Synopsis) has made out this case.
^ It may be well to translate here what Eusebius says about the controversy (he is
speaking of the days of Victor iu the end of the second century, say a.d.' 190) :
" There was considerable discussion in the days of these men, because the Churches
{irapotKiai) of all Asia, supposing that {iis &v) they followed a tradition of older date,
thought it necessary, on the occasion of the feast of the Christian Passover [passover
of salvation], to observe specially the 14th of the month (the day on which the Jews
were enjoined to slay the lamb), and believed that it was altogether necessary on that
day, whatever day of the week it might happen to be, to terminate the fasts ; whereas it
was not the custom for the Churches in all the rest of the world to follow this mode,
because they observed the custom which, handed down from the days of the Apostles,
prevails till now — viz., that it is not fitting to terminate the fasts on any other day
than that ofthe Saviour's resurrection" (H. E. V. 23, — see text, p. 189).

THB PASCHAL CONTEOVEESY. Ixxxvii
sanction does not touch the question as to the day when Jesus Christ
was crucified, still less the question as to the authorship of the Gospel
which bears John's name.
It is very difficult to present the Paschal Controversy in its right
proportions. It is a complicated subject, and it involves a considerable
amount of detail.
The discussion which follows wUl be under the following heads, and
references to the extracts in our text will enable the student to confirm
or chaUenge our own statements : —
1°. The Authorities from whom we learn the Nature and Progress
of the Controversy.
2°. The Controversy and the Combatants at successive stages.
3°. Conclusions.

1. The Authorities from whom we learn the Nature and Progress of
the Paschal Controversy in the Early Church. (See text, pp. 189-
195.)
First, and chief of aU, comes Eusebius, who (H. E. V. 23, — see text,
p. 189) tells us of a dispute between Victor, the hot-headed bishop of
Eome (a.d. 190), and the Church of Asia Minor, regarding the observ
ance of the 14th Nisan. Victor wanted the Asiatics to adopt the Western
custom of keeping Good Friday and Easter (ruling their observance
by the day of the week), and when they would not adopt it, he excom
municated them ! Among those who opposed Victor's arrogant pro
ceedings was Irenseus of Lyons, by birth and training an Asiatic Chris
tian, though now a Westem bishop. He approved of the Western
form of observance, but not of Victor's attempt to coerce the Asiatics
into it.
In the course of his letter to Victor, Irenseus (see p. 191) refers to a
period (some five-and-thirty years before) when his old master Polycarp
visited Eome, in the time of Anicetus. It appears that Polycarp and
Anicetus had discussed the subject of the observance at Easter, the
Eoman insisting on the day of the week, the Asiatic on the day of the
month ; but although one could not persuade the other, they parted as
friends. In their eyes, and in the eyes of Irenseus, the dispute was not
of any vital moment.
Eusebius (H. E. IV. 26) refers to a work of Melito on the Passover,
which fixes its own date by speaking of a dispute in Laodicea regard
ing the Passover during the proconsulate of Servilius Paulus — i.e.,
about A.D. 175.
To Eusebius, therefore, we are indebted for information regarding
three periods of time — Polycarp's time, about a.d. 160 ;^ Melito's time,
' On the date of Polycarp see p. xxxv, and note 1 there.

Ixxxviii INTRODUCTION.
A.D. 175 ; Victor's time, a.d. 190. These are separated by intervals
of about fifteen years.
Hippolytus (p. 192) is another authority. Writing about a.d. 220,
he speaks of certain contemporaries who wished to observe the 14th
Nisan. He charges them with wilful subservience to the obsolete
ritual of Judaism, and with forgetfulness of the fact that the Jews
slew (dvaxpeiv) the true Passover.
Epiphanius (p. 195), about a.d. 368, treats of the " Quarto-decimans "
he (or observers of the 14th Nisan — i.e., the representatives of the old
Asiatic custom) as heretics. His argument is the usual argument of
the Western Church, that Christ, being the True Passover, mu.st have
been slain on the day when the Jews kiUed the paschal lamb.
Last of all, we have " The Paschal Chronicle " (see p. 193, note 5),
which professes to give extracts from early -writers. The Tiibingen
scholars, though sceptical about things most surely received in the
Christian Scriptures, grasp at those extracts with an eager credulity
which is nothing less than amazing. A glance at the alleged extracts
shows that they indulge in a style of exegesis much more mystical
than we should have been prepared by what we read in Eusebius and
elsewhere to find characterising their reputed authors. Furthermore,
the passage ascribed to Hippolytus is not found in his works which are
in our hands. No such book as that ascribed to ApoUinarius is found
in the lists of his writings given by Eusebius, Jerome, and Photius.
Although these facts dispose us to give little heed to the Clironicle, we
shall endeavour to consider its statements in some detail.

2. The Controversy and the Combatants at successive stages.
As we have said already, and shaU have frequent occasion to observe
in the sequel, the controversy was about the proper day of closing a
fast. The Christians of every land, Asia Minor alone excepted, kept
the Lord's Day in Easter week as the day of the Eesurrection, and
closed on that day a fast which they had been observing (see p. 190).
But the Christians of Asia had a sacred feast on the 14th Nisan (on
whatever day of the week it might fall), and closed their fast on that
day — the day when Jews slew their passover (see p. 189). Christen
dom, in short, (Palestine included), terminated the fast on a particular
day of the week ; Asia Minor terminated the fast on a particular day
of the month.
But darkness comes when we go further, and ask what was the
exact observance of the 14th in Asia. What was meant by -jrapa^uXar-
Tuv or by TTjpelv — the words (pp. 189, 191) used for observing the day?
They denoted the end of a fast. But in what way it was connected
with Christ is uncertain.

THE PASCHAL CONTEOVEESY. Ixxxix
The assumption of Baur, that the observance of the day implied the
belief on the part of the original observers that Christ had taken the
Passover on the 14th, contradicts the historical basis of the observance
itself. Its origin was Jewish, not Christian ; but it became Christian.
It was in later times " The Feast of the Passover of Salvation," not
because of the mere date (as Baur's argument requires), but because of
the deep truth it commemorated.
The following seems to be the way in which the diverging customs
originated. The Jewish Christians, including even Paul himself (Acts
xix., XX.) continued when they were at Jerusalem to observe the Jewish
feasts more or less regularly, as long as the Temple stood (see 1 Cor.
viii., X. ; Eom. xiv.). It must have been somewhat different when
they were not at Jerusalem ; but the Jews who did not make a pil
grimage to the Holy City observed the Passover in so far as to eat
unleavened bread, and to rest from work on both the Sabbath days
of the feast (" days of holy convocation "), and very possibly took
some social meal at the hour of the Paschal Supper in Jerusalem.
Thus Paul is said to sail away from Philippi towards Troas " after
the days of unleavened bread," Acts xx. 6. There seems to be
an aUusion to this custom also in 1 Cor. v. 6. This — -written to the
Corinthian Churoh — shows at least how familiar the readers of the
Epistle were with the custom of observing days of unleavened bread.
The custom of having a special observance of the 14th Nisan of
course prevailed most and longest where Jews were more numerous
than Gentiles in the Church. The Ephesian Church was at first mainly
Jewish, as our notices of Aquila and Priscilla, and of the work
done in the synagogue, and of the disciples of the Baptist, &c., may
serve to show (Acts xviii. 19, &c. ; xix. 1, &c. ; Eev. ii. 1, &c.) ; and
St John no doubt found it so on his arrival. That he would take part
in the observance of the day of the Passover is most likely. Hence
the yearly observance of the 14th Nisan in Ephesus, as elsewhere,- — an
observance, Jewish in its origin and Jewish in its associations, which
lingered on long after the Temple had been overthrown, aud the Jews
were left without any national meeting-place or festivals. Christian
associations gathered round it as years passed on.
In some other Churches it died out altogether, and there grew up
instead a yearly celebration of Christ's resurrection on Easter Sunday,
and in consequence a commemoration of His death on the Friday be
fore. Hence some difference of custom, which at first was regarded as
of no great importance. But practically it came to this, that the-
Churches of Asia, which had been confirmed in their observance by
ha-ving had John surviving to sanction it among them (long after the
other Apostles had passed away from the midst of other Churches), kept,
and the rest of the Christian world did not keep, the 14th Nisan. They
kept it, not because of Jewish Law, nor because of Christian Law, but

xc INTEODUCTION.
because of an old abiding custom.' The idea of the Jewish Passover
had faUen into the background, and the thought of Christ as the Tme
and Divine Passover had become prominent. Hence it became " the
Feast ofthe Passover of Salvation."
What, then, of the fasting which seems to have been really the prac
tical occasion of the controversy? In answering this question as
regards the Westem Church, we need have no difficulty. When the
year brought round the time which had been of old that of the Pass
over, the Westem Christians fasted on the day of the week when Jesus
Christ died, and the day He was in the grave,^ but closed their fasts on
the Lord's Day — the day of the Eesurrection. There is more difficulty
as to the Oriental or Asiatic Church. In it, however, we must remem
ber that the Jewish element predominated. The Asiatics had always
on the evening of the 14th kept a feast [eopr-q), a glad feast, and yet a
solemn, as all the Passovers of old were ; and although they had come
to associate it with Christian ideas, it was most of aU with the idea
that Christ is the better Passover, the True Deliverer from awful death,
so that their feast was still a glad one. If they had been fasting be
fore, they would close their fast before this, their feast, began. Hence
apparently the discrepancy in the practice of the two branches of the
Church. At all events, it is on the simple point of an existing discrepancy
that Polycarp and Anicetus were disputing when Irenajus gives us a
glimpse of the earliest-known phase of the controversy. Irenseus, in
writing to Victor (see page 191), tells us that when Anicetus of Eome
desired Polycarp of Smyrna to give up the custom of keeping the
feast [i.e., closing the fast) on the 14th Nisan, Polycarp refused, and
defended his practice by pleading that John and the other Apostles
with whom he had been conversant always kept that day. Anicetus,
on the other hand, held fast by his own Western custom, on the ground
that it had been observed by the Presbyters who were before him. No
interruption of the peace of the Church was caused by this difference
of custom : the two bishops joined in worship and communion, and
observers (ri;poi5vrEs) and non-observers {pJri Trfpcmne's) parted in per
fect peace and amity.
So far as we can see, the whole dispute was about the Asiatic custom
of observing the 14th Nisan as a festal-day, and of therefore closing
the fast on that day. There is no trace of a mention of John's Gos
pel. There is no trace of the controversy being affected by any deci
sion as to the day on which our Lord suffered. Had the dispute at
all turned on the observance of a day in commemoration of Christ's
' Thus we read in the letter of Irenaeus that Polycarp and Anicetus tried to per
suade each other, but without success.
^ The time of fasting was not of equal duration in all places. See what Irenseus
says, p. 191, line 17.

THE PASCHAL CONTEOVEESY. XCl
death, it is impossible that it could have been carried on without quota
tions from the Gospels. We have to bear in mind, too, that the story
is told by Irenseus, whose full faith in the four Gospels^our four,
and those only — is as well known as anything can be. He relates the
dispute with no trace of an idea that the authenticity of the fourth
Gospel is concerned. And he tells of Polycarp, the disciple of John
himself, who had sat at the aged Apostle's feet, and had heard him
often speak of the old days when the " Word made flesh dwelt among
men." This is made still clearer when we see the earlier part of Ire-
nseus's letter, in which he explicitly says that the whole dispute was
about a fast — when it began, and how long it lasted — and implies
by his silence that the date of our Lord's suffering was not involved
at all. " For the dispute is not only about the day, but also about
the character of the fast. For some think that they ought to fast
one day, others two, and others more ; some measure their day as
containing forty hours night and day. And this diversity among
them that observe it is not a thing of our o-wn time only, but at a
much earlier time prevailed among those before us, who, perhaps not
having ruled very strictly, established for the future a custom which
arose in simplicity and isolation [pecuUarity, iSi<jnia-p6v). But, never
theless, all those men were at peace, and we are at peace with one
another, and the difference in fasting establishes the unity of our
faith" (p. 191).
The next notice ofthe subject in Eusebius (H. E. IV. 26 — see p. 192)
refers to a discussion which took place in Laodicea. He says that
Melito, Bishop of Sardis, wrote a book on the Passoyer beginning
thus : —
" In the time of Servilius Paulus, Proconsul of Asia, at which time
Sagaris bore his testimony, there took place much discussion in Laodi
cea about the Passover, which feU at the exact time in those days."
The meaning is, that in the time of Sagaris, on one occasion the day
of the week and the day of the month of Christ's crucifixion corre
sponded, so that the Asiatics and the Western Church were observing
the same day. The coincidence was so different from the usual state
of the case, in which one part of Christendom was fasting in sorrow,
while the other was joyfully celebrating the Eesurrection, that men
were led to pay special attention to the reckoning on which they had
proceeded before. Melito accordingly wrote his book. Eusebius goes
on to teli us that " Clement of Alexandria mentions this book in his
own work on the Passover, which he says he wrote on occasion of
Melito's work."
This is all which is said on the subject by Eusebius, and it indicates
discussion without intimating that it led to a quarrel, or even was
unfriendly.

xcu ^ INTEODUCTION.
We now come to the Third period, to which Eusebius is our guide —
a.d. 190. It is here we learn that the Churches of Asia agreed that it
was necessary to close the fast on the 14th day of the month (ras roii'
ao-irtoii' £7rtA,uo-£ts Troieia-6ai), whatever day of the week it might fall ;
whereas all the other Churches of the Christian world preserved the
custom which had come down from apostolical tradition, to close the
fast on no other day than that of the Saviour's resurrection — viz., Sun
day. So the bishops of other Churches drew up a decree, saying that
the mystery of the Lord's resurrection should be celebrated (EirirEA-otro)
on no other day than the Lord's Day, " and that on that day only we
observe the termination of the Paschal fasts " (p. 190).
But Polycrates (of Ephesus) led the bishops of Asia, who stoutly
asserted (hiia-xypi^opevoyv) that they should at all hazards maintain
their own traditional custorn. In his letter to Victor and the Eoman
Church, he cites the great names of apostolic men who had fallen
asleep in Asia, and who had sanctioned the Asiatic observance. " All
these," he says, " kept the day of the 14th of the Passover according to
the Gospel, making no deviation, but walking according to the rule of
the faith." He speaks of John as "he who leaned upon the Lord's
breast." Victor thereupon published an excommunication of all those men as
heterodox. But the other bishops refused to agree with him, and ex
horted him, on the contrary, to contemplate a course that was calculated
to promote peace, unity, and mutual love. Irensus seems to have
been the chief of Victor's opponents on this point, and in name («
TTpoa-dnrov) of the brethren over whom he presided in Gaul, he wrote a
weighty letter. Asiatic though he was by birth, he agreed -with the
Western Church in regard to observance ; but treating this as a small
matter, he reminds Victor that he was aiming at the impossible in
seeking uniformity in such things. He tells the story of Polycarp and
Anicetus, as already abridged on p. xc.
If now we look back on the whole narrative of Eusebius, we find that
from first to last the whole dispute is caused by a want of uniformity in
the date of closing a fast which seems to have usually preceded the
time of the Passover, — the Asiatics following the Jews in going by the
14th day of the moon. Those Asiatics traditionaUy observed a feast-
day on the 14th, but, as we have said, instead of a Jewish, it had
become, by the natural course of events, a purely Christian one. So
far as we can see, the fourth Gospel is in no way concerned. " The
Gospel" (to tvayyEXtoi/) seems to be supposed to be one harmonious
narrative (p. 191). John's own countenance tothe observance is indeed
pleaded — and probably rightly pleaded— but in his day the feast was
still a Jewish one. And even in the later times, when the "feast of
the Christian Passover" was the name for it, the original idea still
coloured the whole view taken of it.

THE PASCHAL CONTROVERSY. Xciii
But whatever it was about, the controversy was not about the fourth
Gospel, and did not involve the authenticity of that Gospel. The men
who conducted it were well aware of the existence of that Gospel, and
it was impossible to have kept its authenticity out of dispute, if it had
been really concerned. Dr Davidson says that the Christians of Asia
Minor knew the fourth Gospel, but did not acknowledge it as John's.
But we can only admit this when we forget that during the very pre
valence of the controversy Irenasus was writing upon the Gospels, and
that this Gospel was quoted by other writers at a still earlier date.
Upon what, then, if not on the narrative of Eusebius, do the opponents
of the Gospel rely? Upon the anonymous Paschal Chronicle, and
especially on the words quoted from Apollinaris or Apollinarius, who
was Bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia about a.d. 170-180. Eusebius does
not seem to have heard of his work on the Passover (see Eus. H. E. IV.
27"). His testimony, however, is quoted in course of a long dissertation
by the writer of the preface to the Chronicle, the object of which (see
p. 193 and note) is to show that Christ, as being the true Paschal Lamb,
must have fulfiUed the type of the former Paschal lambs by dying on
the 14th. The whole argument is one of typology.
The writer, however, adduces testimonies in favour of the position
he thus maintains. The first extract (p. 193) is said to be from Hip
polytus, "Book against all Heresies." The passage is not found in
Hippolytus's work which has come down to us.' Btit, assuming that
it is true, what does it say ? It is in the same line as the extracts
from Apollinarius which follow. It is to the effect that Christ did
not eat the Passover before suffering, but Himself suffered as the true
Passover. The second alleged extract from Hippolytus is to the same effect.
Christ did not eat the Passover, but died.
It is needless to say that these passages distinctly contradict, not
John, but the Synoptists.
The next authority cited is Apollinarius : —
1. We see that Apollinarius considers the whole controversy — as
Polycarp and Anicetus did before, and as Irenseus did at a later date — a
very subordinate one. It is a case of ignorance, pardonable ignorance
— a mistake. This could not have been his language had the grave
question of the canonicity of John's Gospel been involved.
2. As regards dtru/i.^ioi'os roi v6p.(o, — this means that the idea of the
Quarto-decimans contradicts the law in so far as the Passover (and
therefore Christ as the Passover) must be offered on the 14th. He says
that the 14th was the day of the tme Passover, — not because Christ had
1 In his Ref. Haer. VIII. 12, 5 (Duncker), we have Hippolytus denouncing the
Quarto-decimans of his day (say a.d. 220), but with the additional statement that in
all save that one thing— the observance of rh irdaxa on the 14tli— they agreed with
the Catholic Church.

XClV INTEODUCTION.
eaten on it the typical Passover with the Jews, but because He Himself,
as the true Passover, had offered Himself to God. It appears from this,
that in Apollinarius' s day men were defending their keeping of the
feast on that day by saying that Christ Himself kept one.
3. The words crrao-ta^Etv /car' aurovs ra euayyEXta may be translated in
two ways, either of which comes to the same conclusion — viz.,. that
there was some discrepancy between John and the Synoptists. This
may be (1) said to be the opinion of the Asiatics, or (2) it may (more
probably) be a hesitating conclusion dra-wn by Apollinarius himself.
But in either case it implies that John and the Synoptists were accepted
by all concerned as kindred and equaUy valuable histories. For it is
not Mark or Luke that is at conflict with Matthew ; if any one, it is
John. It is most natural to believe that Apollinarius (or rather, the
author of the extract) is making an inference from the fact that those
Quarto-decimans quoted Matthew, and that he in a hesitating way
suggests that John seems to favour the other view. It is to be
observed that neither Apollinarius nor any one else attempts to
meet the clear statement of the Synoptists, that Christ did partake of
the Passover before He suffered ; and, with the exception of this very
vague allusion, they do not seem to think that John was at issue with
the other evangelists. Apollinarius' s whole case was rested on the
typological idea that Jesus, being the true Passover, must have died on
the 14th.
This, then, far from being against John's Gospel, is really in its
favour. So is the next extract from Apollinarius, in which, with
elaborate eloquence, he declares that " the 14th is the true Passover
of the Lord, the great sacrifice, who, being God's Son (irats), was instead
of the Lamb, who was bound, and bound the strong man, who was
judged and is Judge of quick and dead, and who was delivered into
the hands of sinners that He might be crucified ; who was exalted on
the homs of the unicorn, and who was wounded in His holy side ; who
poured out from that side the two things that cleanse again (?), blood
and water. Logos and Spirit ; and who was buried on the day of the
Passover, a stone being laid on His tomb."
Here we observe that not only is the writer's own view that the 14th
is the day of Christ's burial, and therefore may be said to agree with
what is often supposed to be the view taken in John's Gospel, but he
clearly quotes John in speaking of the water and the blood which
flowed from the wounded side. This, therefore, makes nothing against,
but much for, the general reception of that Gospel which the Tiibingen
scholars aUege to have been forged twenty years before.'^
' " ApoUinarius's " own views regarding the observance of the 14th are not made
very clear. But whatever they were, it is amazing that Hilgenfeld should build upon
them such a superstructure as that Melito and Apollinarius were foes — Melito the
champion of the Quarto-decimans, and Apollinarius of a deutero-Johannine party.

THE PASCHAL CONTEOVEESY. XCV
The extract from Clement leads us to remark that the Western Church
had the worst of the argument from Scripture, when the other side
oould point to the clear statements of Matthew (representing the Syn
optists). They endeavoured to show that the supper which our Lord
ate with His disciples was not the real Paschal Supper, but a prepara
tory meal at which He instructed them in the true meaning of the
Passover. Clement, of course, believed in the Johannine authorship of
the fourth Gospel, and quotes John in speaking of the washing of the
feet. Conclusion.
We have seen that the subject was the observance of the 14th day
of Nisan as a day of a feast necessitating the closing of the fast. It
is obscure enough, and the Asiatic Christians went on in their course,
although the other parts of Christendom opposed their practice of having
a feast at the close of their fast, on the day of the Jewish Passover.
.We have seen that John's Gospel is never supposed to be at stake by
any of the disputants. We have seen some of the disputants quote it.
We have seen Polycrates describe John as one who leaned on the Lord's
.breast, and in the same breath say that the Asiatic custom was accord
ing to the concurrent teaching of the Gospels (xara ro EuayyE'A.tov). We
have " Apollinarius " referring to the blood and water which came from
the wounded side of Jesus ; we know that Irenseus took part in the
controversy, and told an anecdote of his old master Polycarp, without
seeming to know that the truth of that Gospel which must have been
specially dear to Polycarp was at issue.
And we are asked to believe that the fourth Gospel was, meanwhile,
struggling into position as a standard in the Church ; that in some
places it was accepted, and in others unknown ; that it was known in
Asia Minor, but not believed to be John's ; and yet that never from
.first to last did any one refer to it ! If the followers of Baur could
hold that John's Gospel was not yet written, that until the end of the
second century there was no such book, — they would be at least con
sistent. But this is what they cannot say. Even Baur himself
admitted that John's Gospel was written in a.d. 160, and his followers
have been driven back step by step, until by some a date in the very
beginning of the century is admitted.^ The whole elaborate argument,
therefore, that John's Gospel could not have existed, is upset by the
simple proof that it did exist. And the idea that, although the
Gospel was known by those Asiatics, it was repudiated by them as not
placing a second Johannine tradition in opposition to the first. He also would have
it that Hippolytus is replying to Melito, so that Xeyei yap oSras (p. 194, line 1) is,
" Melito says," &c. t, . ¦, , ,. , ¦
1 See Christlieb's 'Modern Doubts and the Christian Faith, for a graphic
sketch ofthe "Tiibingen School."

XCVI INTEODUCTION.
being John's, and yet that there never in the heat of controversy was
one word dropped to show that this was their conviction, asks us to
admit more than is reasonable. Whatever that discussion about the
Passover was — and it is in some respects obscure enough — it was a
pitiful wrangle as compared with the momentous controversy which
Baur would fain have us decide by an inference from it.

XVI.— APOCEYPHAL LITEEATUEE.
The meaning of the name Apocrypha, as applied to certain books, is
a subject of dispute. What is " hidden " may be the origin of the
books, or it may be the esoteric doctrines they are supposed to contain.
But there is no doubt that the word Apocrypha came to denote what
is in a particular way opposed to canonical. The apocryphal books
were not, indeed, canonical, but neither were they secular : they com
peted with the canonical books for the regard of the Christian Church.
For the most part they claimed to have an origin and authority fully
equal to those of the sacred books which were usuaUy accepted in the
Church.1 Speaking generally, it may be said that they took their rise in the
heresies of the second and fourth centuries. The heretics who sought
to establish their views in the midst of the Church, which held by cer
tain books and by their ordinary interpretation, were under the neces
sity of (1) putting forced interpretations on the true books ; or (2) of
altering the text of those true books ; or (3) of constructing new books
for themselves. We find, as a matter of fact, that sometimes one of
these courses was adopted, sometimes heretics followed all the three.
The chief motive-power was Gnosticism.
Gnosticism — which was in the main an attempt to combine revelation
with philosophy — was older than Christianity, and originated in the
encounter of the Jews of the dispersion -with the philosophies of Greece.
and of the East. The tendency to manufacture semi-sacred books, and
the tendency to forge books under famous names, were in full operation
at the beginning of the Christian era. There were at that date books
current under the names of Adam, Moses, &c. ; and others called after
Orpheus, Musseus, Homer, &c. Paul alludes to forged epistles, 2 Thess.
ii. 2, iii. 17. It is not impossible that he has forged documents in
view in 1 Tim. iv. 7 ; Titus i. 14,^ whose authors were Christians that
1 See Tischendorf, De Evang. Apoc. Origine et Usu.
^ See Semler, Proleg. in Ep. Jacobi, pp. 18, 20.

APOCEYPHAL LITEEATUEE. XCVii
had gone back to Judaism. (Compare Titus i. 20, 22 ; 2 Tim. iv. 5).
Gnosticism was essentially eclectic, and its chief endeavours were
directed to the formation of systems with some room in them for every
thing. Just as it drew from Zoroaster, from the Old Testament, from
current philosophy, so also did it draw from pretended Old Testament
writings, bearing ancient names (such as those of Adam, Seth, the
Twelve Patriarchs) ; and also from pretended New Testament writ
ings ascribed to the Apostles, or (indirectly) to Christ Himself.
The time when the Christian Apocrypha were written was, as we
have said, the period from the second to the fourth century. In the
second century men began to appeal to the written Word, because the
living voice of those who had heard Jesus, or who had known those
that companied with Him, was hushed in death. Especially, when
controversy arose, was there an appeal to " that which is written."
The increasing authority thus ascribed to the sacred books led the
heretics, in simple defence of their own position, to forge rivals and
counterparts. Did the orthodox appeal to the words of Paul, or Peter,
or John ? The heretics had also apostolic words to fall back upon.
Here they are ! The Gospel of " Philip," or of " Thomas," or of " Bar
tholomew," or of " Peter." So again in the fourth century, when the
common opinion of the Christian Churoh had gravitated to agreement
on the contents of the canon, and the Church had sufficient unity to
make public and recognised use of the canon or collection, we find a
large and -widely-known number of books outside of that canon. They
were not aU Gospels. Some of them were Acts ; some had other names ;
most of them had received their first shape in the second century, but
had been subsequently manipulated by successive editors.
It must not be supposed that all extra-canonical books were regarded
as heretical. There was a class of books, kno-wn as useful or ecclesias
tical, which were not supposed to be authoritative. Some of them were
special favourites in particular districts, and were habitually read in
the churches, although they were not standards of doctrine. The
" ApostoUc Fathers " belonged to this class, although there were also
others in it. Beneath those books, and quite distinct from them, was
the class of heretical books which heretics had invented or altered so
as to gain conffrmation for their own dogmas. The famous classifica
tion of Eusebius (see pp. 10, 11) is based in the main on the general
acceptance of particular books by the Christian Church ; but it contains
also an outspoken declaration, that while some books were disqualified
from being regarded as canonical by their being only known to sections
of the Church, there were others, the acceptance of which was not only
partial but confined to heretics.
The sacred writings of the first class were set on an eminence sacred
to themselves. No other writings were ever admitted to that position
by the Catholic Church. It is true that individual writers may be
9

xcviii INTEODUCTION.
quoted as referring to those writings which were on the whole rejected;
and it is true that sects of heretics affected to regard particular apocry
phal books as the tme Scriptures. But it is also true that no consensus
of testimony in favour of any apocryphal book can be produced, and
that no book, even of the useful or ecclesiastical sort, has any such
witness in its favour as to admit of its being even put into comparison
with any book now in the canon.! Qne province or one sect might
favour this book or that, but Christendom as a whole was not affected
by the local predilection.
When we look at the New Testament Apocrypha as a whole in order
to analyse or classify the list of some fifty Gospels,^ we find that it may
be reduced considerably.
In many cases the word " Gospel " did not claim to denote a historical
work, but what we may caU an outline of the doctrine of Christianity.
This was St Paul's meaning when he spoke of "my Gospel" (Eom. ii.
16 ; xvi. 25, &c.) The "Teaching of Peter" may have been such a
mixture of fact, argument, and illustration as would be furnished by a
condensed report of Peter's addresses. Thus also Valentinus's " Gospel
of Truth " appears to have been a doctrine of salvation, and not a Ufe
of Jesus (Iren. B. III. 2, 9).^ So also Manes, the founder of the
Manichees, promulgated a " Living Gospel," or " Gospel of Life," or
" Living Truth." Such books " made the Gospel of none effect ; " but
they were not competing historical narratives.
Again, some of the false Gospels were probably only a true Gospel
altered to suit the views of a particular man or sect or party. We
know that Marcion's Gospel was an altered Luke ; Basilides may per
haps have made Matthew (Matthias ? see text, p. 389, and Clem.,
Strom. VII. 17,- 108, p. 900) his basis ; and Apelles is said to have made
similar use of John.* Some of the Gospels, themselves originaUy apoc
ryphal, were certainly reissued with changes according to the ideas of
successive editors. The numerous extant Gospels of the Nativity are
' See Kleuker, ' Ausfilhrlicbe Untersuchung der Griiude fiir die Aechtheit und
Glaubwiirdigkeit der schriftlichen Urkunden des Christenthums : ' Dritte Abtheilung,
§§ 879-893. There is much valuable matter in this book.
^ See Fabricius's Codex Apocryphus, and Kleuker, vol. v. § 898. Compare the
Decree of Gelasius in our text, p. 24. See also Migne, ' Dictionnaire des Apocryphes.'
^ The charge which Irenseus brings against Valentinus is that his system was no
fair inference from, or representation of, the truth of Christ. The ground idea of
his theory was that men are divided into irvevptarmoi or (ppdvifioi ; \jivxiKoi ; (rapKiKoi.
The first class are also yvacrnicol. They, beiug spiritual men, are wholly saved, ob
taining after this life a spiritual body, which indeed they already carry within them.
The second class raise themselves — not without difiiculty — above the indwelling of the
Creator-.iEon or inferior God {STip.iovpy6s), and come under angelic guidance so as to
reach purity, but it is purity without a body. The third class perish wholly, both
soul and body, being unfit for anything better. Those who wish to see how the
human mind runs the same round of speculation in successive ages may compare
those views of Valentinus with the speculations on the resurrection body iu "W. R.
Greg's ' Enigmas of Life. '
* There is doubt if this can be made out regarding the last two. See p. 94.

APOCEYPHAL LITERATURE. Xcix
only recensions or editions of the Protevangel or " Gospel of James."
There are several of those ancient Gospels of which we know only
the names, and it is supposed that many of them are the same book
under different names. We know something (see text) of the Gospel
of the Nazarenes and of the Gospel of the Ebionites, and we have
reason to believe that those, as well as the Gospels of Bartholomew, of
Cerinthus, and of the Twelve Apostles, were recensions of the Gospel
of the Hebrews. And this was apparently a recension of St Matthew.
There was another and a large class, professing to contain true
traditions of Christian doctrine, which had come down by special chan
nels to the authors. Thus the " Gospel of Judas Iscariot " (Iren. B.
I. 35) professed to give the true account of the motives of Judas in
seeking to terminate the baleful reign of Jehovah by betraying Jesus
Christ. The Cainites professed to find their perfect Imowledge in a
book that Paul composed after being in the third heavens. The
" Gospel of Philip " (as stated below) is a collection of ascetic Gnostic
traditions, using the authority of Christ to attack marriage, fec.'
Again it is probable that several of the so-called Gospels were com-
pUations from the canonical Gospels. Tatian's Diatessaron was an
avowed harmony, and it did not stand alone. Ambrosius, a friend of
Origen, says : " Plerique etiam ex quatuor Evangelii libris in unum ea,
quce veneratis putaverunt assertionibus convenientia, referserunt." ^ The
book which Serapion found in circulation in Ehossus (Eus. H. E. VI. 12),
professing to be the Gospel of Peter, seems to have been a harmony of
the Gospel narratives, but with Docetic additions. Jerome, followed by
the Decree of Gelasius, condemns the codices of Hesychius and Lucian,
which seem to have been some kind of harmony, with additions.^
We may divide all the Christian apocryphal books or writings into
Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypses.* Of extant^ apocryphal
^ As frequently noticed in our text, many Gnostics, without giving their views in
a narrative form, professed to have derived the theories which formed the basis of
their philosophisings through a direct aud true tradition from the Apostles. Thus
Valentinus said that his doctrine came from Paul through Theodades or Theodas,
a scholar of Paul ; and Basilides said that his came through Glaucias, a disciple of
Peter (Clem. Alex., Strom. VII. 17, p. 898). See before, p. xlix., and p. 417.
'¦' Ambros. Proem, in Evang. Luc. See Kleuker.
^ Thus Jerome in I V. E vv. Praef. ad Damasum says of their work : "Cum multarum
gentium Unguis Scriptura ante translata doceat, falsa esse qua addita sunt."
¦* This division is best for practical purposes, as corresponding with the contents of
the New Testament. See the Notitia et Fragmenta (xl. fere) EvangeliorumApocry-
phorum iu Fabricius, Cod. Apoc. N. T., p. 335.
^ Of apocryphal Gospels still extant, the raost complete edition is Tischendorf's,
and in it are twenty-two books, some of them duplicates or recensions of the same
work. They are— 1. The Protevangelium or Gospel of James (Greek); 2. Pseudo-
Matthew (Latin); 3. Gospel ofthe Nativity of Mary (Latin); 4. History of Joseph
the Carpenter (Latin, from Arabic) ; 5-7. Gospel of Thomas (three recensions— two
Greek, one Latin); 8. Gospel of the Infancy (Latin, from Arabic); 9-11. Acts of
Pilate (three recensions— two Greek, one Latin); 12-14. Descent of Christ to the
Dead (three recensions— one Greek and two Latin) ; 15, 16. An Epistle of Pilate to

C INTEODUCTION.
Gospels, the most important, as claiming, in whole or part, to date
from the second century, are the Protevangelium or Gospel of James,
the Gospel of Thomas, the Acts of Pilate (sometimes published as the
first part of the Gospel of Nicodemus). These, then, refer respectively
to the parentage, the childhood, and the death of Jesus Christ, and each
of them had many imitators.-"^
The Protevangel, probably dating from the middle of the second
century, and brought to Europe from the Levant by Postel in the
sixteenth century, professes to give a narrative of earlier events than
are found in the canonical Gospels. There are in it various incidents
and statements to which reference is made by early Fathers : as, for
example, the birth in the cave (Justin Martyr, Dial. 78 ^) ; the per
petual virginity of Mary (as Clem. Alex, refers to it *) ; the brethren of
the Lord being Joseph's children by a former marriage (Origen, see pp.
464, 467*). From the time of Epiphanius there can be little doubt that
the book existed in a form very like what it at present bears. His
references to Joachim, Mary's father ; to the assigning of Mary by lot
to Joseph, &c., make this out. The Hebraisms of style, and the many
proofs of familiarity with Jewish custom and tradition, point to a Jewish
or Ebionite author, probably an Ebionite Gnostic. There are anachron
isms ^ which make this conclusion less than absolutely certain ;' but still
it is probable. The name of James was popular among Jewish Chris
tians, and some of them (Eus. H. E. III. 27) believed in the super
natural birth of Jesus from a virgin, as this book teaches. The Gnostic
difficulty of believing Jesus to be sinless when He had a material body
was removed a step backwards when the virgin mother was said to be
a child of supernatural origin, and sinless. The purpose of the author
was to buttress the marvellous facts of Christ's life by investing the
birth of His mother with a kindred miraculous sanctity ; and the book
has been the parent of innumerable ecclesiastical traditions which,
following an eastward course, have furnished the Koran with many
legends relative to our Lord's birth and parentage ; and in their west-
the Emperor (Claudius), and one to Tiberius (found in the Descent of Christ to the
Dead); 17, 18. Anaphora Pilati ; 19. Paradosis Pilati ; 20. Death of Pilate; 21.
Narrative of Joseph of Arimathea; 22. Vindicta Salvatoris.
' Thus the pseudo-Matthew and the Nativity of Mary seek to establish the descent
of Mary from the tribe of Judah, and the sanctity of Joseph the carpenter. The
clumsy forgery. No. 4 (in the list in the previous note), carries the greatness of
Joseph much further, though not so far as the modern Church of Rome.
^ There are two other passages in Justin with verbal coincidence — Apol. I. 33,
Dial. c. 100.
' Clement (Strom. VII. 16, p. 890) separates himself from those who own the
authority of the story by saying " (pani nves." Jerorae expressly disclaims all
faith in there being midwives at Mary's delivery, and so sweeps away the story.
* Origen (Comment, in Mat., vol. iii. p. 463) sets the Gospels ascribed to Peter and
to James on the same level.
^ Such as the High Priest's plate, the Twelve Tribes still existing, the rejection
of Joachim's gifts because he was childless, &c.

APOCEYPHAL LITEEATUEE. CI
ern development have culminated in our own day in the authoritative
promulgation, by Pope Pius IX., of the dogma of the immaculate con
ception of the Virgin Mary.'^
The Gospel of Thomas, containing a narrative of the life of Jesus
from His fifth to His twelfth year, found in many form.s — Greek, Latin,
and Syriac, with very numerous variations — may perhaps date from the
second century, and, at all events, contains curious incidents, to which
reference is made by Ireneeus ^ and others. Origen^ and Eusebius
speak of a Gospel of Thomas to condemn it, as also does the Decree of
Gelasius, In this Gospel are found the well-known stories of miracles
wrought by the child Jesus, such as making sparrows of clay, carrying
water home in his garment, killing and reviving a harsh teacher, &c.
They are childish freaks of omnipotence.
What is popularly called the Gospel of Nicodemus comes next ; but
under this title (which seems to date from the time of Charlemagne)
two distinct works are combined : —
(1.) "The Acts of Pilate" is a brief title of what professes to be a
memorial of what our Lord Jesus Christ did under Pontius Pilate, and
is an expansion of the canonical narrative, especially of John's Gospel.
The impotent man (John v. 5), and the blind man (John ix. 1), and
a cripple and a leper, appear before Pilate to testify to Christ,* &c.
(2.) The "Descent of Christ to the Under World" professes to be an ac
count by Simeon and his two sons of what took place when Christ, as
King of Glory, burst open the gates of Hades, and bound Satan, and
removed the saints of old time to a higher state of being. It is a noble
poem, with a simple majesty surpassing all that Milton has sung, and
free from the grotesqueness which detracts from the grandeur of Dante.
But this — the second part of the " Gospel of Nicodemus " — is not so
old as the first. The other books referring to Pilate in the apocryphal
list are of little moment.^
1 The Decree of Pope Pius IX., Dec. 8, 1854, was : "The doctrine that the most
blessed Virgin Mary was preserved from all original siu iu the very first moments of
her conception by a special grace and privilege of Almighty God, conferred upon her
in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind, has been revealed by
God, and therefore must be firmly and constantly held by all the faithful."
2 See Iren. Hjer. B. I. 16, where he tells of the arithmetical raarvels discovered in
the alphabet by the Marcosiaiis. He does not name the Gospel of Thomas as his
authority, but it -contains what he refers to. . , , ,
3 The reference in Hippolytus to the Gospel of Thomas, "'E/ie & Cvrav evpiio-ei iv
vaiSiots &irh irav eirrh.," gives a passage not in the book as we now have it.
* The narae of Pilate's wife (Procla) is given ; the woman with the issue of blood
is called Veronica ; the soldier who pierced Jesus' side is Longinus. Other tradi
tions give this name to the centurionat the cross. The penitent thief, Dysmas, and
his unbelieving comrade, Gestas, are also naraed. „.,-,,.,,,
= On the Acts of Pilate see pp. 174 (and note), 464, 465. Tischendorf s elaborate
argument in favour of his position that this is the book Justin knew, fails to make
out its existence in the third ceutury, Eusebius does not say he had seen it.

oil INTEODUCTION.
We may further roughly group the lost apocryphal Gospels as —
I. Gospels forged in the names of Apostles. — Philip,' Bartholomew,^
Andrew,^ Peter,* Thomas,® Judas Thaddseus,^ Judas Iscariot, '^ Mat
thias,* Barnabas,^ the Twelve Apostles.^"
II. Gospels named after those who used them. — The Gospels of the
Hebrews, Nazarenes, Ebionites, Egyptians, come first under this head."-
1 Gospel of Philip. —It is uncertain whether the Evangelist or Apostle was the pro
fessed author. The book was a collection of ascetic Gnostic traditions inculcating
self-denial. Jesus is said to haye taught Philip what the soul ought to say in ascend
ing to heaven, aud how to answer each one of the powers above. If any man had
begotten children, he must wait below till he could take his children with him. See
Epiph. Hair. 26, 13.
^ Bartholomew. — Condemned by Gelasius. In l^is Pref to Comment, on Mat. Jer
ome speaks of it, and condemns it as untrue. There is a story that Pantaenus found
Bartholomew in India, preaching the advent of the Lord Jesus according to Matthew's
Gospel, and that Pantaenus brought the Gospel of Matthew, written in Hebrew, back
with hira to Alexandria. (See text, p. 133.) It is possible that Bartholomew had
written out Matthew's Gospel, and that his copy, with preface and alterations, after
passing through various hands, was called the Gospel of Bartholomew by those who
did not know its true history.
* Andrew. — Condemned by Gelasius. It is perhaps the apocryphal Acts of An
drew which came to bear the narae of Andrew's Gospel.
. ^ The Gospel of Peter, see p. 466. — Eusebius groups it with the Gospels of Thomas
and Matthias as unworthy of regard. Some identify it with the Gospel of Basilides.
^ Gospel of Thomas. — Besides the Gospel of the Infancy (to which reference is
made), there was another Gospel of Thom'as written by one of the twelve scholars of
Manes (see p. 24). It was used by Gnostics and Manichees, and condemned by
several Fathers. Some think — ^but not very probably — that the two books were the
same. ^ Gospel of Judas Thaddceus. — Condemned by Gelasius. It has been conjectured
that the name is a mistake for Matthias.
' Gospel of Judas Iscariot. — As noticed on pp. 385, 386, note 1, this Gospel was
full of hatred of the Jews aud the Mosaic doctrines, and was in use among the
Cainites. One of the primary principles of the sect was, that before a man could be
saved he must make trial of every kind of vice.
8 Gospel of Matthias. — No undoubted fragment of this often-mentioned Gospel re
mains. Several Gnostics founded upon writings ascribed to Matthias. Clem. Alex.
(Strom. VII. 17, p. 900) naraes the followers of Valentinus, Marcion, and Basilides
as doing so, — see also Hipp. Hser. VII. 20. The quotation of Clem. Alex, from the
Traditions of Matthias on the duties of an elect person (text, p. 452) is probably
from another book than the Gospel, if indeed it be from a book at all. Some sup
pose that a book of Matthias is one of those to which St Luke refers in the Preface
to his Gospel. See MiU, Proleg. in N. T., § 53.
' Gospel of Barnabas. — Condemned by Gelasius. No trace of this Gospel remains.
Sorae say Barnabas translated Matthew's original Hebrew into Greek. We are told,
also, that his body was found with the Gospel of Matthew lying on his heart, written
in his own hand. There is a curious Mohamraedan imposture professing to be the
Gospel of Barnabas. It tells of Jesus appearing to His mother and disciples to say
that it was not He but Judas who had died on the cross, and that the name of Jesus
would bear the reproach of a death of crucifixion until Mohammed appeared to deliver
all believers frora error.
1" Gospel ofthe Twelve Apostles.— This is supposed to be a name for the Gospel of
the Hebrews in one of its many forms, and probably was the name used among the
Jews of Palestine. See Kleuker, § 952.
^' See under chapter x. , p. Ixviii.

APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. ciii
Next we may enumerate - the Gospels of the Encratites,i of the Mani-
chees,^ of the Valentinians,^ of Basilides,* ApeUes,® Cerinthus,* Simon-
ians (or of Scythianus).^
III. Harmonies. — Tatian's Gospel, and those of Peter, Hesychius, and
Lucian, have been already mentioned. They seem to have come under
this head.
IV. Miscellaneous.— Gos^&l of Eve,* of Perfection,^ of Seth,!" [of
Truth]."- The foregoing is a general list and classification of the apocryphal
Gospels. The value of those books to the student of canonicity does
not lie in thefr quotations from our canonical books, because all such
quotations are subject to suspicion, owing to our uncertainty of the
date of the apocryphal Gospels, and our certainty that they were much
altered after their first composition. Some quotations are given in our
text, and some have been indicated in the foregoing paragraphs. The
apocryphal books are valuable because —
1. They imply th^ existence of the canonical books. They are in
thefr very nature supplementary. They attempt to speak of what the
New Testament does not tell : of the previous history of Mary, of the
childhood of Jesus, of His life while His body was in Joseph's tomb,
1 The Gospel of the Eneratites ("the continent") is conjectured to have been Ta
tian's Diatessaron, because Tatian hiraself was an Encratite. But it may have been
the Gospel of the Egyptians, which certainly favoured Encratite views.
^ The Manichees used three books — Zav EiayyeXiov, Gospel of Thomas, and Gos
pel of Philip. The first was a Doctrine or Gospel of Life — the true Christian teach
ing, according to Manes.
^ See p. 413 and note. The name of this book was the Gospel of Truth. It was a
book of Jewish Theosophy, not intended as a substitute for our Gospels, but as a
doctrinal treatise. See p. 70.
* See on the Exegetics of BasiUdes, pp. 389, 390, and notes. See also pp. 82, 99.
^ Apelles was mentioned by Jerome and by Origen. On his book and his position
generally see p. 480 and note.
" See on Cerinthus, p. 384, note.
' Scythianus was a predecessor of Manes. This book was a Manichsean Gospel,
and was used by the Simonians (Photius). It was probably a statement of Mani
chsean doctrine, and contained a pretended narrative of our Lord's life. Scythianus
wrote a " Book of the Four Quarters of the World," and its divisions were — 1. The
Gospel; 2. The Quintessence {Ke(paXaia) ; 8. The Mysteries (the Old Testament);
4. The Treasures (the New Testaraent). See Kleuker, § 985.
* Eve. — Used by the Ophites, and pretending to be what the serpent taught the
woman. See p. 886, note. (Epiph. Hser. 26.)
" Perfection. — Used by Gnostics. Some regard it as the same with the Gospel of
Philip, or that of Basilides, or that of Eve. (See Epiph. H»r. 26.)
1" Seth.— Vsei by some Syrian Gnostics : see p. 886, note. Seth was reported to
have had divine beauty, and to have invented the Hebrew alphabet, and discovered
the celestial signs. He is alleged to have planted a bough of the tree of life of which
Moses got a branch in his miraculous rod.
1' This was the Gospel of the Valentinians. See note 3 above.

CIV INTEODUCTION.
and of other and similar subjects of curiosity. But they would be
unintelligible if they stood alone. Considered in themselves, they are
incapable of constituting the Scriptures of a religion. The Jesus of
whom they tell is one well known and adored on the strength of other
narratives which describe the object of His life and teaching. None
of the three we have spoken of as the best of their kind could account
for its own existence, if the Gospel of Jesus Christ as we have it in
the canon were not presupposed. The existence of those apocrypha
in the second century is a testimony to the older date, and the au
thority of our Gospels.'-
They do not so explicitly as Clement of Eome or Polycarp disclaim
aU competition with the inspired writings, but they imply subordina
tion in their whole texture.
2. The amazing discrepancies in the different MSS ofthe apocryphal
Gospels are proof that men felt themselves at liberty to manipulate
those books as they pleased. No sacred awe kept the hands of the
copyist and the chronicler from adjusting them to suit his own views.
No salvation was periUed on their veracity. Let them say what they
might, it could not essentially alter the course of history. It is true
that, we have traced the Ebionite in one, the Marcosian in another :
but while one man twisted the tradition in one direction, another
twisted it in the very opposite, and all betray a consciousness that the
books are but outworks from which the inner citadel of Christian
Eevelation may be assailed or protected. When a heretic of real
power wished to make a heretical book the very Bible of his sect, he
must, like Apelles or Marcion (or Basilides ?), take some one of the
four Gospels, and — either by dilution or abridgment — torture it to
serve his purposes. The Gnostics were the chief parents of apocryphal
writings, but the earliest Gnostics invented meanings and explana
tions of facts, not the facts themselves. Their books were essentially
commentaries or essays, or philosophising upon acknowledged Scrip
tures. But when some leader of a subdivision of one of the great heresies
desired to distinguish himself, or to confirm in men's minds the notions
of the school to which he belonged, he could do no better than issue,
a new or a revised apocryphal Gospel. It took up subjects omitted
in the canonical books : it did not therefore come into direct com
petition with them ; and the reader or hearer was not on the alert
against such supplementary speculations. Among people predisposed
to receive it, the book had therefore ready acceptance. In course of
time another man manipulated the book for a slightly different pur
pose : if of another country, he translated it with such omissions or
additions as he chose. Hence it is that we have in the extant apocry-
1 See Iren. B. III. 1, quoted p. 67. ("Tanta est autem circa Evangelia hsec firmi-
tas," &c.)

APOCRYPHAL LITERATURE. CV
phal Gospels various recensions of which we are uncertain whether to
speak as recensions or as different books. When we compare those diver
gencies—say in the Gospel of Thomas and the pseudo-Matthew, or the
nativity of Mary — with the smaU points involved in the "disputed
passages " of Scripture, we have an argument of real weight. In the
one case the great changes show us that we have compositions whioh
it was no one's business to protect from the editor's caprice ; and in
the other, from the anxiety to maintain the text, we see that we have
books which all Christendom accepted so heartily, and guarded so
faithfully, that it was not in an editor's power to make material altera
tions. 3. We may further and fmally say, that wide as has been the influ
ence of the apocryphal Gospels on Christian traditions and Christian
art,^ its nature was from the first such as to make it easy to understand
how the names of the books perished from memory. There was usu
ally nothing in the traditional incident to alarm a believer in Scripture,
while the .very name of the book as a pretender to canonical authority
was reprobated. One can easily see how few Christians would care
to quote or to acknowledge the books condemned in the Decree of
Gelasius, and yet how easily the traditions they contained would be
often embodied in sermons and works of art. When the canon was
regarded as complete, the older apocryphal books naturally feU into
disuse and were forgotten. Thus from the fourth century onwards
there was an increasing disregard of the names of the once famous
books, and from the sixth century they seem to have been forgotten.'
The Papal Church has persisted in this disregard of the books, while
yielding more and more to the tendencies which they represent. It is
the' Protestant Church which has exhumed them, and Protestant theo
logians see most clearly their historical and apologetical value.
The apocryphal Acts are, with one exception, not so old or so impor
tant for our purpose. The full list of those given in Tischendorf s
^ The great preachers of the fourth century systematically used the incidents of
apocryphal history as ornaments of their sermons, and a similar use of them contin
ues in the Unreformed Churches to the present day. The festivals of the Romish
Church are full of the Apocrypha. The "descent into hell " is a prominent feature
of the so-called Apostles' Creed. There is nothing more usual in lives of saints than
power over wild beasts, such as is recorded in " Thomas," &c. Christian art abounds
in still more numerous illustrations. Joseph is an old man, often holding a rod ;
sometiraes he has a mitre ; sometimes an ox and ass are near, adoring Christ. In
Greek temples and monasteries, the annunciation is made while Mary is at the well
with a pitcher. The birthplace of Jesus is painted as full of holy light streaming from
the child. Though the crucified were naked, Jesus is always represented as having
a linen cloth while on the cross, and with the crowu of thorns. The stories of the
Virgin's Death (which belong, however, to the Acts rather than to the Gospels) are
often represented in Christian art. These are only specimens of the influence of
the Christian Apocrypha. See Tischendorf, De Origine et Usu, &c. ; and Nicolas,
Etudes sur les Evangiles apocryphes.

CVI INTEODUCTION.
collection is long : (1) Acts of Peter and Paul, (2) of Paul and Thecla,
(3) of Barnabas, (4) of Philip, (5) of Philip in HeUas, (6) of Andrew,
(7) of Andrew and Matthias, (8) Acts and Martyrdom of Matthe-w, (9)
of Thomas, (10) Consummation of Thomas, (11) Acts of Bartholomew,
(12) of Thaddeus, (13) of John. Of these, the Acts of Paul and Thecla
(see note, p. 180) is the most important, and probably dates from the
second century.' Some of its quotations are given in the text, p. 180,
&c. It is superfluous to say that it testifies to the Pauline writings.
But the narrative in its present form contains many, things to which one
naturally ascribes a date much later than the second century. There
is not only inculcation of celibacy in the strongest terms-, but prayers
for the dead, a high view of the sacraments, and (in one version)
laudation of reUos.
This leads us to notice the distinctive feature of the apocryphal
" Acts." Each book has a distinct purpose, which usually is to solve some
knotty question of Church Discipline or Government. We know how
many of the chief questions which emerge in the Church find their sol
ution in St Luke's narrative : and those uncanonical books seek to
occupy similar ground with Luke. The position of women in the
Church is evidently before the mind of the author of " Paul and
Thecla," and he seeks to secure that it shall be a prominent one.
Celibacy is greatly glorified in the same book. The " seal," as it
is called, of the Sacrament, is much prized. In the Acts of Thomas,
baptism with oil is treated as a royal chrism ; and Gnostic mysticism
is greatly enhanced in the accompanying incantations or prayers. The
Acts of Barnabas teach that " orders " are indelible : the Acts of
John that Christ's humanity was a semblance. Some of the books
have an ethical purpose : in the Acts of Philip we have a powerful
warning against revenge ; in the Acts of Andrew and Matthias the
cruelty of the unregenerate human heart is expounded.
But, on the whole, the purpose of each book is to show — not like
St Luke's narrative, how the Gospel of Jesus Christ was brought to
bear on Jew and Gentile, on the mob, or on the potentate, but — how
some special, even minor, point was the burden of an Apostle's teach
ing and labopr. In this the Apocrypha betray their later origin. The
central Christian doctrine is taken for granted ; men's minds are full
of some detail. Miracles have become portents or trials of strength — -
are no longer subordinate agencies in the inculcation of spiritual truth.
The interest of each narrative also is usuaUy limited and local, not
universal. Certainly no one of them ever gained — possibly none ever
sought — the regard of the Church of Christ as a whole.
' See details in Tischendorf's Prolegomena to his edition of the Acts, p. xxiii ; or
in Jones on tbe Canon, vol. ii. p. 326. Jerome says the baptigm of a lion was narrated
in this book. This is not in the copy whioh we have. This has thrown doubt ou
the antiquity of the work in its present form.

APOCEYPHAL LITERATURE. Cvil
In the second century there was a famous collection of apocryphal
Acts by Leucius Charinus (see text, p. 25), who seems to have been a
Gnostic, somewhat after the fashion of Marcion. His book, known as at
Tu)v d-TToa-ToXwv ¦n-epioSoi, contained Acts of Peter, Jolm, Andrew, Thomas,
and Paul (so Photius). It is doubtful whether the extant "Acts"
were ever portions of that book, which seems to have had some inter
nal unity. Zahn (Acta Joannis, p. cxiii) dates " Leucius " in a.d. 130.^
There is an apostolical history in ten books ascribed to Abdias,
Bishop of Babylon. It is a clumsy forgery, probably not earlier than
the sixth century, — certainly not earlier than the fifth.^
The apocryphal Epistles — such as Laodiceans, the Epistles to the
Corinthians and the Philippians (see p. 209, note), the letter of Jesus to
Abgar (Eus. H. E. I. 13), and the letters ascribed to Pilate (noticed
above) — are also to be passed with simple mention. The letters of
Paul to Seneca are an interesting forgery (see p. 209). The student
of Church History may be interested in Eusebius's strong statements
regarding the correspondence of Jesus with Abgar.
The apocryphal Apocalypses of the New Testament do not fill so
important a place in the history of criticism, or in doctrinal controversy,
as do some of the Apocalypses of the Old Testament.^ The Apoc
alypse of Paul professes to utter what Paul had seen : the Apocalypse
of John reads Uke a travesty of the canonical book, the chief point of
interest being recognition of each other in the future state of the good:
" Mary's falling asleep " has in it, in several versions, substantially the
same story of all the Apostles being brought from their various scenes
of labour, even the dead from their graves. Passing by the others, we
may mention the Assumption of Moses,* which professes to be a charge
by Moses to Joshua, and ends abruptly. Some critics believe that if
we had it all, we should have the passage which Jude quoted ; and an
incident to which Clem. Alex, refers (Strom. VII. 15), when he repre
sents Joshua as seeing Moses double, — one part ascending with the
angels, one buried in the earth. Nay, they find that Moses was the
original of the pheenix, — his mortal part falling to the earth, his immor
tal part rising to the skies. All this is pure hypothesis, though it
has attracted the clear mind of Hilgenfeld.^
1 See Fabricius, p. 970, aud Kleuker, p. 1027, for what raay have beeu another
book by Leucius (called "Leontius"). Zahn's interesting arguments in behalf of
the fragments on John are insecure. He considers thera fatal to the idea that there
ever was a Presbyter John. If his arguments hold good, there is a new liuk in the
proof of the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel. See Zahn, p. cxlviii.
2 The author uses the Vulgate and Rufinus's translation of the Clem. Recogn.
" See on Old Testament Apocalypses, Dillmann in Herzog's Encyclop., p. 306, &c.
" Fabricius published some fragments ; in 1861 at Milan there was fouud a fuller
work, ' Fragmenta Assumptiouis Moses.'
^ See his Nov. Test. ex. Cau. Rec.

ovm INTRODUCTION.

XVII.— THE FOUETH GOSPEL.
It is perhaps superfiuous to make any comments upon the testimonies
to the fourth Gospel in the text of this work ; but as that Catena con
tains nearly aU the citations on which stress has ever been laid in the
controversy of about half a century, it may be useful to the student to
have a few notes on what are really the most important points.
The Catena contains not a Uttle whioh will not bear much pressure ;
but it also contains materials from which a strong chain may be con
structed. If Papias "used testimonies" found in the first Epistle of
John, and if the Presbyters ' who were his contemporaries quoted
from the Gospel, we have the earliest possible. evidence for the exist
ence and authority of the Johannine writings. For Papias -was a
"hearer of John" (Irenseus), perhaps lived with him (see Anast. Sin.
on p. 59). See the Note on John at Ephesus, p. xlv.
We may be certain that Barnabas used the fourth Gospel. It scarcely
needs Keim's powerful argument to this effect ; the passages themselves
make it pretty clear. There remains, of course, the question as to the
date of Barnabas ; and I do not think it can be put in the first century,
but it can scarcely have been later than twenty or thirty years after
John's death.
The expressions in Clement of Eome are too vague, and those in
Ignatius of too uncertain date, to warrant our founding upon them.
But it is not possible to pass over the clear words of Polycarp ; and the
theology and the tone of Hermas remind us of the fourth Gospel with
a perpetual suggestiveness which isolated quotations cannot adequately
represent. Turning from the direct line ofthe Church, we have Basilides, a.d. 125,
whose words seem proved to be those we find in Hippolytus. About
the Clementine Homilies, there can no longer be any doubt as regards
distinct quotation, now that Dressei has discovered the complete MS
with the words of John ix. 20 emphatically used. There may well
be raised the question of the date of this book, but it is rather strange
to find doubt of its antiquity and value among those who impugn the
fourth Gospel ! AU that the Tiibingen scholars said of the great im
portance of the Clementines before Dressel's publication in 1853 is
1 Even if we do not follow Routh iu regarding the "Presbyters" as meaning
Papias in this case (and I regret having put it so in the text), the date of the testi
mony quoted by Irenaeus remains the same. See pp. 71, 72 of our text, and notes.
Compare Routh's notes, Rei. Sac, pp. 17, 31, in which it is not clear whether Routh
meant Papias or the authorities on whom Papias relied.

THE FOURTH GOSPEL. CIX
turned against them, now that the book witnesses for the Gospel they
assailed. The Acts of Pilate has been so freely used by its copyists
or possessors, that — like other apocryphal books — it is an insecure
witness ; and, while it may be mentioned, it cannot be pressed. The
same is true of the Acts of John. See supra, p. cvii.
There are few things made more clear of late than the rightful enrol
ment of Justin Martyr among the witnesses for John's Gospel. There
has been a growing appreciation of this fact, and the latest authors are
the most expUcit.'-
That Heracleon and Ptolem^us must be reckoned on the same side
cannot be doubted. And the date of Heracleon makes the devotion of
that learned Gnostic to John, as to a text-book, very significant. In
this devotion he was not exceptional among his fellows. The earliest
Gnostics in the second century give us not only quotations from the
Gospel of John, and the first commentary upon it, but in the key-notes
of their various systems (Marcion excepted) we find indubitable proofs
of its influence. The ordinary teachers foUowed in the track of the
Synoptists, but the Gnostics took up, in imitation of the fourth Gospel,
those great problems of the relations of the Spiritual God and faUen
man, of light and darkness, of life and death, of the world and the
believer, of spfrit and the body, which John has made so prominent.
The Muratorian fragment is as explicit as it can be. When we pass
the middle ofthe century, and come to the works of Tatian, Athenagoras,
and Theophilus (with a quotation by name), we are out ofthe region of
controversy.^ At the same time we are bound to remember in this con
nection that the evidence of Irenseus is not fairly estimated if we think
of his date alone. The weight of what he says comes from his dfrect
connection -with John through Polycarp. It is inconceivable that one
so learned and so intelligent could be mistaken in beUeving that his
beloved master Polycarp was the disciple of the beloved Apostle of
Jesus Christ.* Yet this is the paradox which Keim * set himself to
establish, in attempting to overturn the long-accepted tradition of the
Church, and to prove that the Apostle John was never in Ephesus.
There is some examination of this elsewhere (see p. xlv). We may
here note that he fixed the date of the Gospel at a.d. 110-117, and we
may agree with Dr Samuel Davidson in his quaint confession that
"Keim's date, a.d. 110-117, under Trajan, makes it exceedingly diffi
cult to disprove Johannine authorship." ®
1 In Dr Sanday's book on the Gospels, to which 1 so often refer, is an able argument ;
and Professor Drummond's article (see p. 178) striltes me as singularly conclusive. _
2 The uncertain date of Celsus detracts from the value of his testimony, but it is
not to be overlooked (see p. 375). ,„ ttt n . > ^i. ¦ ~ •
3 See in page 182. In the first passage from Irenseus (B. III. 3, 4), the avrov is
Polycarp, who is the authority for the anecdote. „ ^. „ , i.
1 Anticipated by Liitzelberger, who ascribed the authorship of the Gospel to
Andrew ; to sorae extent by Wittichen. See on Keim's withdrawal, p. vi. note 2.
^ Davidson, Introduction to New Testament, vol. ii. p. 426.

cx INTEODUCTION.
The natural conclusion from this rapid review is that we have as
early, if not as numerous, proofs of the existence of John's Gospel as
of the existence of the Synoptists ; and that in the whole stream of
Christian thought during the second century, we have more indubitable
proofs of its influence than of the influence of any other single book of
the New Testament. This is the testimony of the Church and of the
Heretics — given with a unanimity which is impressive. And what is
there on the other side ? There are said to have been some individuals
in the end of the second century who refused to accept this book be
cause of the unpalatable nature of its teaching regarding the Holy Spirit,
and Epiphanius tells us of a sect or party in Lybia excited to opposition.
They were not numerous, nor were they powerful ; they did not rely
on any external evidenoe ; they are chiefly memorable because of the
happy nickname ("AXoyot or Alogi), by which Epiphanius (who is very
proud of it) hit them off as "irrational," as well as rejecters, of the
Gospel of the Logos or Word of God.
Prom the second century until quite a recent date, scarcely a voice
was ever lifted against the J ohannine authorship. Luther was content
to give up the rest of the New Testament if he had John, Eomans, and
1 Peter. Schleiermacher, and all whom he influenced, held by this
Gospel as the most precious spiritual teaching in Scripture. But a
change came about sixty years ago. The solitary scholar (Bretschneider)
who (1820) advanced among critical "probabilities" the idea that the
book was not written by John, but by some other critic in the beginning
or middle of the second century, was met with such firm opposition
that he published his recantation of his suggested doubts. But his
views were, nevertheless, soon after maintained by Strauss, and since
his ' Life of Jesus ' was published (1834-35), the fourth Gospel has been
the battle-ground of criticism. A much greater Wiirtemberger than
Strauss — F. C. Baur — maintained that the Gospel was written and
started into great popularity about a.d. 160. He ascribed the popu
larity to the fact that the author had something to say that suited
everybody, — one party of heretics finding their views of the Holy Spirit,
another their cosmogony, another their opinions on the Paschal con
troversy, while Paul's followers found their master's principles carried
out further and more fully than by themselves, and the whole Catholic
Church rejoiced in the exposition of Christianity as the one absolute
religion. In aU this Baur did not take into account that every party
would have been sure to denounce the new book for what it contained
contrary to their special tenets. But, moreover, the sufficient answer
is the proof that the Gospel was actually in use long before the time at
which he supposes it to have been written. Keim pushed it back to
the days of Trajan, 'and all Christian tradition (see Irenseus on p. 183)
vouches for John's surviving till that reign. There is no possibility
of a book claiming to be John's being written by some one else, and

THE FOUETH GOSPEL. Cxl
palmed off upon the Church as his. There would have risen up a host of
eager disciples to deny that their revered master ever wrote the book.
Thus much may be said on the external evidence and the history of
the controversy.
But in course ofthe controversy men's minds have turned to the con
tents of the Gospel, and have analysed them with microscopic care.^
Though it does not faU within the plan of this book to deal at any
length with this aspect of the question, it may not be out of place to
indicate briefly what appear to be some results of the discussion.
1. One result has been to dispose of the idea that the book was
vn-itten by a secretary (even though Weizsacker (1864) and Ewald
(1861) lend it their support), or by a committee of John's congregation,
or by any other than an eye-witness. In the first chapter, the passing
over of the disciples from the Baptist to Jesus, and the many minute
notes of time (w. 35, 39, 43), are recorded as by one who was recalUng
the most memorable events of his own youth. The minute remembrance
of time and detailed incidents, and the familiar acquaintance with the
home and haunts of those whom he mentions (as of PhUip in i. 43), are
seen throughout the book. See the time of the marriage, and the num
ber of firkins (ii. 1, 6) ; the parenthetical mention ofthe other boats (vi.
23) ; the apparently superfluous naming of Ephraim (xi. 54) ; the minute
account of the coming of the Greeks, though no notice is taken of the
direct result of their application (xu. 20) ; the many little touches of
association with John the Baptist (vi. 59, x. 40) ; the spot of each of
two notable incidents (viu. 20, x. 23), &o. When such things as these
meet our eye, we see the eye-witness himself mingUng Uttle details
which have no significance, except that he did remember them, with
the momentous portions of his narrative ; but we do not see things
which it would occur to a reporter to record, or which, indeed, it would
be natural for him to keep in mind. These little touches establish the
truth bf the Evangelist's claim : " The Word was made flesh, and dwelt
among us : and we beheld His glory ; " or in the beginning of his flrst
Epistle (for it cannot be doubted that the same man wrote it), " That
which we have seen and heard declare we unto you."
The remarkable sketches of character are evidently the work of one
who had known in daily intercourse the men and women of whom he
writes. We come to know Andrew and Philip and Nathanael and
Thomas, as well as we know Peter through the other evangelists ; and
of Peter himself we learn also much that is new and touching. Martha
' Reference may be made to the commentaries of Meyer, Godet, Luthardt, Lange,
Watkins, Westcott, and to Weizsacker's "Untersuchungen" (1864), Wittichen's
'Der geschichtliche Character des Evangeliums Johannis' (1868), and his ' Lebeu
Jesu ' (1876), and to Dr Sanday's ' Authorship and Historical Character of the Fourth
Gospel ' (1872). In this book Dr Sanday has gathered all that was said before him,
and has fused it iu a new treatise with much that is his own. In the paragraphs
given in these pages, I am most indebted to Wittichen and Weizsacker.

CXll INTRODUCTION.
and Mary, and Mary of Magdala, acquire a new distinctness of outline.
The character of Nicodemus, in his progress towards the truth, and
that of Pilate, who seems to tremble and hesitate even when he is
fixed on the historic canvas, are sketched with the conscious power of
a close observer of them both.
In the same connection we may notice the touches of autobiography.
The continued notice of the Baptist has been often pointed out as
showing that the writer was one of the two disciples who passed over
from him to Jesus (i. 37). It is said that, after the faU of Jerusalem,
some of John the Baptist's disciples aimed at being a permanent sect,
and that this Gospel, by one of themselves, was written to remind
them of their master's real relation to the Eedeemer of men. In this
Gospel he is only called "John." Others might need to distinguish
hina from the son of Zebedee ; but when that son of Zebedee himself
was writing, he did not think of there being two of the name. And
the Evangelist is evidently one of the disciples whose slowness of
heart he sorrowfully recaUs (xvi. 17 ; ii. 17-22). The scenes at the
successive meetings after. the Eesurrection are so described as to show
indirectly the character and position of the writer.
2. We see further that the author was a Jew of Palestine. His whole
tone of thought is formed on the Old Testament. That Hebrew of
Hebrews, Paul himself, was not mpre a Hebrew than this writer. The
Old Testament is the law (vii. 19), and also a prophecy of Christ (v. 29-
46). The figures and types of the Old Testament are more constantly
reproduced in this Gospel than in any other book of the New Testa
ment save the Apocalypse. Jesus is the true temple (ii. 19), the true
brazen serpent (iii. 14), the good Shepherd (x. 11), the true manna, the
living water, the Paschal lamb. Only one who had breathed the at
mosphere of Israel could have told, as this evangelist teUs, how the
coming of Messiah was the centre of all Jewish thought. He is at
home in Jewish customs and arrangements, domestic, sacred, and na
tional (vii. 37, X. 22, xix. 31), and in Jewish ritual and the controver
sies which sprang from it (iii. 25, vii. 22). No other writer has so
sharply limned the religious condition of the ruling party in Israel, with
" thefr ossified learning and their raw realism " (Wittichen), their
fanatical theory and inconsistent practice (vii. 34, vii. 15, viii. 32, iii. 4,
vi. 15, vii. 32, &c.) He has walked on the roads and been tossed on
the seas of Palestine, and his step is easy and sure when he is guiding
his readers among them (iv. 6, xi. 18, vi. 19-21). His simple sentences,
and his repetition of thought, show that " in the style of John the
clothing alone is Greek, the body is Hebrew."'- None but one who
was a Jew, as well as an eye-witness, could have entered into the very
soul of the nation, so as to represent all the various types of national
1 See on this subject Wittichen, ' Der geschichtliche Character des Evangeliums
Johannis ' for very full details. The phrase in the text is Godet's.

THE FOUETH GOSPEL. Cxill
character in the dramatic dialogues whioh are so frequent in the book.
The Baptist, Nicodemus, Nathanael, the blind man, the priests in the
temple, describe themselves in a few words.
3. Further, the author, though a Jew, was an enlightened disciple of
Christ. The Jews are stiU the flock of God, but Christ has other sheep
not of that fold. " He died not for that nation only." " Salvation is of
the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers
shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth (iv. 22, 23). For 1800
years we have been advancing into the meaning of those words ; and
even now we are only learning how much they mean.
It is thus that the use of the term " the Jews " is to be explained.
As he looks back, the disciple sees that it was on account of misguided
national feeling the opposition to his Master was so intense and so
prolonged ; and the most prominent features before his mind, as he
recalls the Incarnate Son of God in Israel, are on the one hand Jesus en
deavouring to exalt the nation, and on the other hand the great mass
of that nation — the Jews — blindly resisting Him. This is strikingly
brought out (vii. 35) when the Jews are amazed at the idea of His
leaving Jerusalem to teach His brethren scattered among the heathen,
and with scorn suggest the supremely ridiculous idea, that He would
perhaps even teach the Greeks ! " He came unto His own (ra tSta),
and His own (ottSiot) received Him not."'^
4. This leads us to notice the calm authority with which the Evan
gelist writes. I confess to being unable to doubt that the writer had
a fuU knowledge of the synoptic narratives. The very first chapter,
with its sudden introduction of both Messiah and the Baptist, wpuld be
unintelligible unless on the supposition that readers of his Gospel
were afready famiUar with the synoptic writers. But when he had
them before him, nothing but a full persuasion of his independent
right to- speak could have led him to make a book so unlike theirs.
There is an evident and intentional supplementing of the other narra
tives at the outset (iii. 24), for they begin the ministry of Jesus at the
time when John was cast into prison (Mark i. 14). He explains them
sometimes. The words, " 0 Jemsalem, Jerusalem, . . . how often," &c.
(Mat. xxiii. 37), suggest the repeated visits of which he alone tells us.
He sometimes needs them to explain his narrative : thus he aUudes to
many miracles, and to crowds that came, though of those mfracles he
has not said a word before (ii. 23, iv. 45, x. 37, xn. 37, &c.) In
simple consciousness of a right to speak, he sets himself to add to
what men already knew of that life which he had seen.
5. He writes with a definite purpose. There has been much contro
versy as to what that purpose was. But he has told us ; and his own
words characterise his Gospel as one might expect that they would
^ He speaks of "your law" (viii. 17, x. 34) to remind thera how impossible it
was for them to disown the authority to which He appealed.

CXIV INTEODUCTION.
(xx. 31). He reports what will show that Jesus was the Incarnate
Son of God. We know that at the end of the first century this was a
needed counteractive of prevailing tendencies to error.
A very old tradition (Clem. Alex., see p. 75) says that John saw in
the synoptic narratives the body of the Gospel, and that he wished to
show its spirit. And this is true. He assumes that Christ's life is
already known : but he wiites for a Church which could now " bear "
more, than when the truth was first spoken and written.
It thus came to pass that he made incidents subordinate to speeches.
We are not told directly what was the effect on Nicodemus of the in
terview by night, — the teaching regarding salvation by regeneration
engrossing the writer's thoughts. Neither are we told whether the
Greeks who came to see Jesus did see and hear Him, — the attention of
the -writer being fixed on the Saviour's doctrine of self-sacrifice. It is
as though the ordinary incidents were sufficiently known, while com
paratively little had been heard of the Saviour's higher teaching.
For it is higher teaching, and therefore parables almost entirely
disappear. The Synoptists tell us, that while those who were low in
the spiritual scale could not understand more than the parables, the
disciples heard in private the explanation of those parables. Ahnost
all the discourses in the fourth Gospel are addressed either to instruc
ted Jews or to sympathising disciples. If we compare the fourth
chapter of this Gospel with the explanation of the sower and of the
tares in Mat. xiii., we find a wonderful resemblance. The parable in
both cases becomes a metaphor worked into direct teaching and state
ment. In some other cases in the fourth Gospel where ordinary hear
ers were addressed, the circumstances at once suggested and explained
the figures whioh Christ employed. Thus it was as natural to speak
to Paschal pilgrims (chap, vi.) of food provided by God, as to tell the
woman by the well (chap, iv.) of living water.
If, then, the author of the fourth Gospel was an eye-witness of the
scenes he describes, and describes them so as to give us incidentally
his autobiography ; — if we learn from his narrative that he was a Jew
of Palestine, and an enlightened disciple of Christ ; if we see that he
writes as one possessed of independent authority, and writes with a
definite purpose ; if we further learn that he was a favoured disciple of
Jesus, who wrote after the other narratives had been for some time in
the possession of the Church, — we are shut up to the conclusion that he
was John, the son of Zebedee, who survived the other Apostles, and lived
until the truth was menaced by errors which this Gospel was written
to counteract. This is in accordance with the old belief of the Church,
as was proved by the Catena of external evidence.
There are, however, some other points which we can best notice in
connection with the ordinary objections to this conclusion. It is said
that —

TUE FOUETH GOSPEL. CXV
(a) " The discourses are longer in the fourth Gospel than in the
others." But this is not so. The Sermon on the Mount, and
the last addi-ess to the general crowd of auditors, — both found
in St Matthew, — are longer than the discourses in our Gospel.
The real difference lies in the greater number of incidents
recorded by the Synoptists.
(j3) " The doctrine taught is different." But the difference is only
in detail and fulness. The whole doctrine of John as to the
mystery of the relations of Father and Son is contained in Mat.
xi. 25-30. And the closing counsels recorded by John be
fore the Eedeemer's death may be found condensed in Mat.
xxviii. 18.
(y) " The form of Christ's speeches is not the same." It is true that
in the Synoptists they are usually brief, pointed, epigrammatic ;
in John usuaUy (not always) expanded and more connected.
This may partly come from the fact that the Synoptists describe
the home life and the teaching in Galilee, while John records
the intercourse with doctors in Jerusalem, and with instructed
disciples. But I think that there is another consideration of
more importance. It is admitted by every one that in all the
Gospels all the discourses are much abridged. But how do
men give to others a fair idea of what a speaker says when
they do not give aU he said ? There are two ways. One is, to
report verbatim portions or passages of his address ; the other is,
to give an outline of the whole without any one sentence being
fully reproduced, though every expression may be (not neces
sarily is) what the speaker used. Now the Synoptists report
by extract, John reports in outline.
(8) " The doctrine of the Logos is peculiar to John." But that doc
trine is confined to the Preface. It is avowedly the historian's
own.
(e) " The Greek of the fourth Gospel is pure." It is. But John was
never a poor man ; he had a house in Jerusalem, and must have
been accustomed to speak Greek in the capital all his days.^
His Greek is easy and natural ; but it is the Greek of an edu
cated Hebrew. It is less Hebrew than the Apocalypse ; but on
the supposition of common authorship, the interval between the
writing of the two works had been spent in the Greek city of
Ephesus. Cato at 80 learned Greek, and Plutarch almost as
late in life learned Latin. (See Disraeli's ' Curiosities of Litera
ture,' vol. i. p. 98). Jerome acquired Hebrew after he was 30 ;
and David Livingstone learned a wild tongue in Africa, and
forgot his own, after he had passed middle age.
1 See Caspari, ' Chronologisch - geographische Einleitung ; ' and Dr Roberts's
' Discussions,' or his more recent, ' The Bible of our Lord.'

CXVI INTRODUCTION.
(s) "John never names himself as the author." It is true ; but there
can be little doubt that he describes himself as the " disciple
whom Jesus loved." All we learn of the fragrant old age of
John in Ephesus ^ makes it likely that this descriptive title had
become a proper name of the venerable saint, and it was only
natural that he should use it to add authority to his great and
final testimony to the Master on whose bosom he had lain.
Sometimes one thinks that the egotism of the ambitious spirit
that had once asked, or prompted his mother to ask, the dis
tinction of sitting -with his brother on either hand of the Lord
when He came into His kingdom, had been meUowed into the
old man's delight in claiming, — as he did claim, and that with
truth, — when he looked back through seventy years to the life
of Jesus of Nazareth, that it was he who had been nearest and
dearest of all to the Heart that was broken by the world's sorrow
and sin. If this be still egotism, it is not the less a touch of
human nature which makes us feel John to be of our kindred.
There was only One in whom was no fault at aU.
[Cj " The Jesus of the fourth Gospel is not the same as He of whom
the Synoptists teU." I think the best answer to this is found
in the witness of Christendom through all the centuries. AU
believing men have felt that the four narratives describe one
Ufe— that of the " God-Man" (Origen). The Church of Christ
was not built on an abstraction, or on an idea, but on a Personal
Sa-viour whom it has known through each one of the four Gos
pels. And the Church has always recognised that the Saviour
must have been such a One as the fourth Gospel describes, —
dweUing in a light and in a shadow which never rested on any
other.
' The story of the young robber, and the closing charge to his scholars to love one
another, are illustrations.

Analytical and Chronological Index op most important Witnesses to the Time of Jerome.
*,* The small Roman numerals refer to the Introduction ; the Arabic figures to the Text.

Whiter.

Date.

Works Extant,
AND Remarks.

New Testament Books used.

Page.

Barnabas.

c. 119 nr 120 a.d.

An Epistle.

Mat., Luke, John, Heb., 1 and
2 Tun.

i-vii,102,168,255, 262.

Clement.

C. 90-100 A.D.

One genuine Epistle.

Synoptists, indications of John,
Acts,Eom.,l Cor.,Eph., iTini.,
Titus, Heb., James, 1 Peter.

viii-xxiv, 104-106,
170, 222, 272.

Hermas.

c. 142 A.D.

An Allegory called

Coincidences witt the language

xxiv - xxvi, 108,

"The Shepherd."

and teaching of Mat., Luke,
John, Acts, James, 1 Peter,
Apocalypse.
Mat., John, 1 Cor., Eph., Phil,

175, 336.

Ignatius.

0. 107 or 11.5 A.D.

Seven Letters, perhaps

xxvi - xxxiii, 1 10,

genuine.
1 Thess.
171, 224.
Polycarp.
0. 140-1.55 or 166
An Epistle to the Phil
Mat., Rom., 1 Cor., Gal, Eph.,
xxxiii-xl, 112, 257,
A.D.
ippians.
Phil., 1 and 2 Tim., 1 Peter,
1 John.
304, 320.
Papias.
fl. 70-150 A.D,
Fragments in Eusebius.
Mat., Mark, 1 Peter, 1 John,
Apocalypse, and traces of
acquaintance with John's
Gospel.
Mat., Luke, John, Eom., 1 and
xH-xlvi, 53, 167.
Basilides.
C. 125 A.D.
Passages in Hippoly
xlvu-Uii, 173, 389.
tus, Epiphanius, &c.
2 Cor., Eph., Col, 1 Peter.
Marcion.
c. 135-142 A.D.
Large passages in Ter
His Canon comprised a muti
liv, 75, 154, 393
tulUan and Epipha
lated Luke ; ten Epistles of
(note). See his
nius, and references
Paul, also mutilated — viz.,
Gospel, 393-410,
in Justin and Irenseus.
Gal., 1 and 2 Cor., Eom.,
1 and 2 Thess., Eph., CoL,
Philemon, PhUip.
75 (note).
Writer.

Date.

Works Extant,
AND Remarks.

New Testament Books used.

Page

Valentinus.

c. 140-160 A.D.

Passages in Irenseus

Integrum Instrumentum — pro

liv, 413-419, 413

and Hippolytus.

bably the complete Canon —
clear references to Mat., Luke,
John, Eom., I Cor., Eph.,
Heb., and 1 John.

(note).

Heracleon.

Not later than A.D.
160.

...

Mat., Luke, John, Eom., 1 Cor.,
2 Tim., with commentary on
John.

419-422.

Ptolemaeus.

Not later than A.D.
160.

Mat., Mark, John, Eom., Cor.,
Gal, Eph., Col.

422-424.

Clement's Second

c. 120-140 A.D.

Really a Homily.

Probable use of Mat. and Luke,

xviii, 106.

Epistle.

and of Epistles to Eph. and
Tim. (Apparent use of un
canonical writings.)
Clementine Hom
C. 160 A.D.
An Ecclesiastical or
The four Gospels. (Uncanoni
Ixiii, 184, 438-444.
ilies, Eecogni
Doctrinal Eomance.
cal allusions.)
tions, Epitome.
Justin Martyr.
c. 139-146 A.D.;
Two Apologies, andDia-
The four Gospels and Apoca
liu-lxui, 59, 114,
died A.D. 148.
logue with Trypho,
lypse, incidental correspond
143, 156, 176,
a Jew.
ence with Eom., 1 Cor., Col.,
2 Thess., Heb. (Uncan. aUus.)
217, 337.
Tatian.
C. 170 A.D.
Allusions in Eusebius,
Diatessaron, probably a Harmony
liv, 72, 180, 219,
&c., and Address to
of the four Gospels. In Ad
227, 72 (note).
the Greeks.
dress John, possibly Mat,
Eom., 1 Cor.
Hegesippus.
C. 177 A.D.
Fragments in Eusebius.
Mat., Luke, probable aUusions
to language and sense of Pas
toral Epistles.
77, 127.
Athenagoras.
C. 177 A.D.
An Apology, and Tract
on the Eesurrection.
Mat., John, Eom., Gal., 1 and
2 Cor.
131, 181, 228.
o
>¦>O >¦
tri >¦e
o aoo
6 I— I
o >¦
t-1
Writer.

Theophilus.

The Syriac (Pe
shito) Version.
The Old Latin
Version.
Muratorian Canon.

The Churches of
Vienne & Lyons.
Celsus.

Irenasus.

Clement of Alex
andria.

Date.

Works Extant,
AND Remarks.

c. 180-193 A.D.

The second cen
tury.
The second cen
tury.
0. 160 or 170 A.D.

c. 177 A.D.

c. 178 A.D.

c. 140-202 A.D.

c. 189-219 A.D.

Treatise addressed
Autolycus.

to

An Epistle, preserved
by Eusebius.

Portions of a polemi
cal Treatise against
Christianity as dis
cussed by Origen.
Treatise against here-

Several Treatises.

New Testament Books used.

Mat,, Luke, John, Eom., 1 and 2
Cor.,Eph.,PhiUp.,Col, 1 Tim.,
Titus, also Heb., and I Peter.
AU, except Apocalypse, Jude, 2
Peter, 2 and 3 John.
All, except Heb., 2 Peter, and
probably James.
Directly and by inference the four
Gospels, Acts, thirteen Epistles
of Paul, two, perhaps three,
Epp. of John, Jude, Apoca
lypse, Epp. of James and Peter
not mentioned, and no certain
ref. to Heb. (Apoc. of Peter).
Coincidences of expression with
Luke, John, Acts, and most of
the Epistles of St Paul, also 1
Peter, 1 John, and Apocalypse.
The four Gospels, possible traces
of acquaintance with St Paul.

The four Gospels, Acts, twelve
Epistles of Paul, I Peter, 1
and 2 John, Apocalypse;
Philemon not named, Heb.
not acknowledged.
All, except James, 2 Peter, and
3 John, which are not recog
nised, and Philem. not named.

Page.

73, 182,
(note).
1,2.

259, 73

Ixxix, 3-8.

158.

369 (note).

Ixxxvu, cix, 45,
66.

Ixxxi-lxxxui, 50,
74, 277.

Writer.

Date.

Works Extant,
AND Eemabks.

New Testament Books used.

Page.

Tertullian.

c. 160-220 or 240

Many large Treatises.

AU, except James, 2 Peter, 2

46, 75, 278, 46

A.D.

and 3 John.

(note).
Ixxxiii-Ixxxv, 8, 9,

Origen.

0. 184-253 A.D.

Several large Treatises

Four Gospels, the Acts, thirteen

and Commentaries.
Epistles of Paul, Heb., 1 Peter,
1 John, Apocalypse, James,
and Jude ; 2 Peter, and 2 and
3 John are doubtful.
51, 52, 81.
Dionysius of Alex
0. 247-265 A.D.
Fragments of Letters,
The whole Canon, but ascribing
86, 345, 86 (note).
andria.
(Eouth's Eel. Sac,
vol. iii. p. 223), and
allusions in Eusebius.
the Apocalypse to another
than the Apostle John.
Eusebius.
0. 270-340 A.D.
Ecclesiastical History,
Christian books in three classes.
16, 87, 207, 10
and minor works.
Acknowledged, four Gospels,
Acts, Epp. of Paul, 1 John, 1
Peter, Apocalypse (perhaps) ;
disputed, James, Jude, 2 Peter,
2 and 3 John ; spurious, Apo
calypse, apparently, and many
Apocryphal writings.
(note).
Athanasius.
c. 329-373 A.D.
Festal Letters andgreat-
er works.
All our Canonical books.
13 (note).
Cyril of Jerusalem.
Died 386 A.D.
Various works.
All, save the Apocalypse.
19 (note).
Epiphanius.
c. 367-403 A.D.
Treatises on heresies.
A Canon exactly ours.
21, 95 (note).
Chrysostom.
Died 407 a.d.
Commentaries and Ser
mons.
All, except that he never cites
the Apocalypse, nor Jude, 2
Peter, 2 and 3 John.
23.
Augustine.
c. 354-430 A.D.
Commentaries, and
The Eeceived Canon, doubting
22, 22 (note).
many other works.
authorship of Heb.
Jerome.
0. 329-420 A.D.
Commentaries, and
various Treatises.
The Eeceived Canon.
21, 99.
iVJ9. — The above Index is an extension and adaptation of the useful Index given by Dr Sanday,
' The Gospels in the Second Century," pp. 382-384.
CANONICITY.

I.
OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION
OP
SACRED CHRISTIAN BOOKS.

1. The Syriac Version (Peshito).
The Peshito (or 'simple') version of the Scripture seems to
have been from a very early age in common use throughout the
regions where Syriac was spoken. Notices in the New Testa
ment show that Antioch was at the first one of the most im
portant centres of Christian influence; and that the organising
power of the faith in Jesus so bound together the community
of believers in that city as to lead to their receiving the dis
tinctive name of Christians (Acts xi. 19. 26). The early legend
of Abgar, Toparch of Edessa, writing to Jesus Christ and receiving
an answer with the promise of an Apostle's visit (Eus. H. E. I.
13), shows how soon the Gospel was understood to have taken
root in those regions. It is now generally believed that at least
from the second century until the present day there has been
used by Syriac-speaking Christians that version of the N. T.
which is known as the Peshito. Scattered and hostile Churches
have the same book: MSS of all ages contain it in substantially 1

2 OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION.
the same form. Its list of Books is the same as our present
Canon, save that it wants the Apocalypse, Jude, 2 Peter, and
2 & 3 John. This may be regarded as the Testimony of the
Syrian Church in the second century. ^

2. The Old Latin Version
is also of very remote antiquity. It was the Bible of the large
and vigorous African Church. It appears in the writings of the
Translator of Irenaeus. It had been so long current before
Tertullian's time that its phrases moulded popular speech and
Christian thought in his day. The translation of loyog in John's
Gospel by Sermo was a proof of its rude simplicity which rather
distressed him. Its Canon did not originally contain Hebrews
(though it had been enriched by it before Tertullian's time);
2 Peter was also wanting; and the testimony of the greater
part of the MSS is to the effect that James was not in it.^
This therefore is the testimony of the African Church of the
second century. "While the Koman Church was using Greek,
the African shores of the Mediterranean were inhabited by a
Latin-speaking Christian people whose Canon was (save as re
gards Hebrews, 2 Peter, and probably James) the same as our
own. '¦ See Scrivener, Int. to Crit. of N. T. p. 273. Even those who claim for the
Curetonian Syriac an earlier date than they accord to the Peshito , admit that a
Syriac version did exist in the second century. Melito quotes an 0. T. as o
Supo; (see Mill, Proleg. CXXVII.), and Euseb. H. E. IV. 22 says that Hegesippus
i'x TE TOU xaS' 'Eppatou? euayYeXtou xai tou SupiaxoO, xa\ JStco? ix t^s
'Eppa'fSo; SmX^xtou Tiva tCStjciv.
2 Tischendorf names 2 Codd. containing James.

mueatoeian canon.
3. Muratorian Canon.
{Text according to Tregelles.'^)
quibus tamen Interfuit et ita posuit. u
tertio EUANGELII LIBEUM SECaNDO LuCAN
s 
Lucas Iste medicus post acensum XPI.
Cum eo Paulus quasi ut iuris studiosum.
Secundum adsumsisset numeni suo
b
ex opinione concriset dnm tamen nec Ipse
ut
• dniAii in carne et ide pro asequi potuit.
Ita et ad natiuitate lohannis incipet dicere.
QUAETI EUANGELIOEUM lOHANNIS EX DECIPOLIS
cohortantibus condescipulis et eps suis
dixit conieiunate mihi* odie triduo et quid
cuique fuerit reuelatum alterutrum
nobis ennarremus eadem nocte reue
latum andreae ex apostolis ut recognis
centibus cuntis lohannis suo nomine
c e
cunta discribret et ideo licit uaria sin
culis euangelibrum libris principia
doceantur Nihil tamen dififert creden
i
tium fedei cum uno ac principal! spu de
clarata sint in omnibus omnia de natiui
tate de passione de resurrectione
r
de conuesatione cum decipulis suis
ac de gemino eius aduentu
Primo In humilitate dispectus quod fo
s
tu secundum potetate regali pre
clarum quod foturum est. quid ergo
mirum si lohannes tam constanter
sincula etia In epistuhs suis proferat
• See Introduction for an account of the Manuscript. 1*

OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION.
dicens In semeipsu Quae uidimus oculis
nostris et auribus audiuimus et manus
nostrae palpauerunt haec scripsimus & uobis
Sic enim non solum uisurem sed auditorem
sed et scriptore omnium mirabiliu diii per ordi
nem profetetur Acta aute omniu apostolorum
sub uno libro scribta sunt Lucas obtime theofi
le comprindit quia sub praesentia eius singula
gerebantur sicute et semote passione Petri
&
euidenter declarat Sed profectione pauli ad (b) ur
bes ad spania proficescentis Epistulae autem
Pauli quae a quo loco uel qua ex causa directe
sint uolenMibus intellegere Ipse declarant^
PrimQ omnium corintheis scysmae heresis In
c
terdicens deinceps B callatis circumcisione
Eomanis aute orw*dine scripturarum sed et
principium earum osd esse XPM Intimans
prolexius scripsit de quibus sincohs Neces
se est ad nobis desputari Cum ipse beatus
apostolus paulus sequens prodecessoris sui
lohannis ordine nonnisi comenati. semptae
ii
eccleses scribat ordine tali a corenthios
prima, ad efesios seconda ad philippinses ter
tia ad colosensis quarta ad calatas quin
ta ad tensaolenecinsis sexta. ad romanos
h
septima Uerum core(i)ntheis et tesaolecen
sibus licet pro correbtione Iteretur una
tamen per omnem orbem terrae ecclesia
deffusa esse denoscitur Et lohannis eni In a
pocalebsy licet septe eccleseis scribat
tamen omnibus dicit ueru ad filemonem una'
et at titu una fit ad tymotheu duas pro affec
to et dilectione In honore tamen eclesiae ca
tholice In ordinatione eclesiastice
de(i)scepline scificate sunt Fertur etiam ad

MUEATOEIAN CANON.
Laudecenses alia ad alexandrinos Pauli no
re
mine fincte ad hesem marcionis et alia plu
ra quae In c/iatholicam eclesiam recepi non
potest. Fel enim cum melle misceri non con
cruit epistola sane Iude et superscrictio
lohannis duas In catholica habentur Et sapi
entia ab amicis salomonis in honore ipsius
scripta apocalapse etiam lohanis et Pe
tri tantum recipe(i)mus quam quidam ex nos
tris legi In eclesia nolunt Pastorem uero
nuperrim e^ temporibus nostris In urbe
roma herma conscripsit sedente cathe
tra urbis romae aeclesiae Pio eps frater
eius et ideo legi eum quids Oportet se pu
plicare uero In eclesia populo Neque inter
profe tas conpletum numero Neque Inter
apostolos In fine temporum potest. i
Arsinoi autem seu ualentini . uel mitiadeis
nihil In totum recipemus. Qui etiam nouu
psalmorum librum marcioni conscripse
runt una cum basilide assianum catafry
s
cum contitutorem

(Text as probably to be read.)
 iquibus tamen interfuit et ita posuit. Tertium
Evangelii librum secundum Lucam. Lucas iste medicus post
ascensum Christi cum eum Paulus quasi ^ut juris studiosum
3 secundum adsumsisset nomine suo ex *opinione conscripsit —
Dominum tamen nec ipse vidit in carne — et idem prout as-
sequi potuit: ita et a nativitate Joannis incepit dicere. ^Quarti
» This probably refers (as Eus. H. E. III. 39) to Mark's Gospel.
* juris studiosum: an obscui'e, probably corrupt reading. Hilgenfeld says the
original was SsuTepaYUvtaTiQi;.
3 Secundum. Eouth reads secum. Volkmar suggests that secundum is =
Nachfolger, helper.
* Ex opinione. xaSus £'So?ev auTU, Luke i. 3. Some read ex ordine, for
* Quarti: supply auctor.

6 OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION.
Evangeliorum ^Joannes ex discipulis. Cohortantibus condisci-
pulis et episcopis suis dixit: Conjejunate mihi hodie triduum,
et quid cuique fuerit revelatum alterutrum nobis enarremus.
Eadem nocte revelatum Andreae ex apostolis, nt recognoscen-
tibus cunctis, Joannes suo nomine cuncta describeret. ''Et ideo
licet varia singulis Evangeliorum libris principia doceantur nihil
tamen differt credentium fidei, cum uno ac principall spiritu de-
clarata sint in omnibus omnia de nativitate, de passione, de re
surrectione, de conversatione cum discipulis suis, et de gemino
ejus adventu. * Primum in humihtate despectus, quod fuit se
cundum potestate regali praeclarum, quod futurum est. Quid
ergo mirum, si Joannes tam constanter singula etiam in Epi
stolis suis proferat dicens in ^semetipso: Quae vidimus oculis
nostris, et auribus audivimus, ei manus nostrae palpaverunt,
haec scripsimus vobis? Sic enim non solum visorem, sed et audi
torem, sed et scriptorem omnium mirabilium Domini per ordinem
profitetur. Acta autem omnium apostolorum sub uno libro scripta
sunt. Lucas ^""optime Theophile" comprehendit, i^quia sub
praesentia ejus singula gerebantur, sicut et i^gemote passionem
Petri evidenter declarat, sed et profectionem Pauh ab urbe ad
Spaniam proficiscentis. Epistolae autem Pauli, quae, a quo loco,
vel qua ex causa directae sint, volentibus intelligere ipsae de
clarant. Primum omnium Corinthiis schisma haeresis interdicens,
deinceps ^^Galatis circumcisionem, Eomanis autem ordine Scrip-
8 Joannes ex discipulis: to distinguish him from the Baptist before named.
Jerome gives a similar account.
' Et ideo licet. This seems to refer to some remarks prefixed to the whole,
which are lost.
8 Primum — secundum. So Westcott. Eouth and Volkmar retain Primo et
secundo. Wieseler reads quod futurus est in the following.
9 Semetipsum (Westcott). Comp. 1 John i. 1. It may intimate a contrast be
tween John's personal testimony in his Epistle, and the conjoined testimony
which the Gospel is here said to be. Comp. John xxi, 24 but also xix. 35. The
quotation in the text is from 1 John i. 1,3, not verbally.
10 "optima Theophile" = a quotation, Luke i. 3, xpaTiare OeotptXe. Others
read optimo Theophilo: others optime Theophilo.
' ^ iiuia : some read quae for quia.
»2 semote &c. Evidently corrupt. The martyrdom of Peter in Eome is ap
parently implied here. Credner keeps declarat as the verb after semota by a
Graecism. Hilg. reads ^^ sicut et semota passione Petri evidenter declarat sed et
profectione Pauli," &c. Westcott suggests semota . . declarant: Routh remota . .
declarant. > 8 Galatis. The MS has " Deinceps B. callactis.'' B marks Galatians as
second in order of the Epistles. (Treg.)

MUEATOEIAN CANON. 7
turarum, sed et principium earum esse Christum intimans, pro-
lixius scripsit; de quibus singulis ^^necesse est a nobis dispu-
tari; cum ipse beatus Apostolus Paulus sequens prodecessoris
sui Joannis ordinem, nonnisi nominatim septem ecclesiis scribat
ordine tali: Ad Corinthios prima, ad Ephesios secunda, ad Phi-
lippenses tertia, ad Colossenses quarta, ad Galatas quinta, ad
Thessalonicenses sexta, ad Romanes septima. Verum Corinthiis,
et Thessalonicensibus licet pro correptione iteretur, una tamen
per omnem orbem terrae ecclesia diffusa esse denoscitur. Et
Joannes enim in Apocalypsi licet septem ecclesiis scribat, tamen
omnibus dicit. Verum ad Philemonem unam, et ad Titum unam,
et ad Timotheuin ^^duas pro affectu et dilectione; in honore
tamen ecclesiae ^^cathohcae, in ordinatione ecclesiasticae discipli-
nae sanctificatae sunt. Fertur etiam ad ^'Laodicenses, aha ad
1 'Alexandrinos, Pauli nomine fictae ad haeresem ^''Marcionis,
et alia plura, quae in catholicam ecclesiam recipi non i^potest;
fel enim cum melle misceri non congruit. Epistola sane Judae,
et superscripti ^^Joannis ^^duas in catholica habentur; et ^oSa-
pientia ab amicis Salomonis in honorem ipsius scripta. Apoca
lypses etiam Joannis, et Petri, tantum recipimus, quam quidam
ex nostris legi in ecclesia nolunt. Pastorem vero ^^nuperrime
' * necesse. Probably alluding to the bearing of the three Epp. on the con
troversies of the writer's day.
> 5 duas. In both instances of its occurrence diias is probably a singular noun
= a pair.
'" Catholicae. Tregelles points to Acts ix. 31 as the origin of this phrase.
' ' Laodicenses I See fragments of an Epistle (Latin) to the Laodicenses (not
Alexandrinos \ however so old as this) in Westcott, Canon, App. E. The
reference here is perhaps to Ephesians as in Marcion's Canon. It is conjectured
that the Ep. to the Alexandrians here mentioned is the canonical "Hebrews," but
this again rests on a conjecture that the Hebrews addressed in that Epistle were
Alexandrians. Ad haeresem = n:po? al'peatv, bearing upon the heresy: or supply
refutandam. • * potest. Apparently a Graecism as a rendering of H^ecjtiv : or SuvaTov
£aTiv. 1 ' Joannis. It is doubtful whether all the three of John are here alluded
to, the second being regarded as part of the first; or whether he regards himself
as having quoted the first already.
2" ei Sapientia. Some read ut: but iu that case the allusion or comparison
is obscure. It is better to suppose that there is a gap in the original MS. "Wis
dom" was a name given to "Proverbs" as well as to the apocryphal book "Wis
dom of Solomon." (See Treg.)
" nuperrime, &c. Upon this passage the conclusions as to the date of the
fragment are based. Origen supposes that the "Shepherd" may he written by the
contemporary of Paul: but the statement in the text is explicit.

b OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION.
temporibus nostris in Urbe Roma Hermas conscripsit, sedente
cathedra Urbis Romae ecclesiae Pio Episcopo fratre ejus; et
ideo legi eum quidem oportet, se publicare vero in ecclesia po
pulo, neque inter Prophetas, completum numero, neque inter
Apostolos, in finem temporum potest. ^ ^Arsinoi autem, seu Va
lentini, vel Mitiadis nihil in totum recipimus. Qui etiam novum
Psalmorum librum Marcioni conscripserunt una cum Basilide
Assianum Catafrygum constitutorem ....

4. The Canon of Origen.
{Euseb. H. E. H. 25.)
After giving Origen's Catalogue of the "22 Books in use among the Hebrews,"
Eusebius says that Origen proceeds:
Ev ds rcJ5 nqaTc^ tu)v elg to ¦/.ara MaT&aiov, tov iyixXyjaiaaTt-
y.ov (pvXttXTWv yiavova, /xova Ttaaaqa sldhat, svayyiha [xaQrvQeTai,
loSi nwg yqdcpcav
Sig EV naQaSoOii (jiad-cov^ ticqI xav nGGuqwv B'vay'ytXicov , a xai
(lova avavTi^Q'TjTct iaziv sv rrj vjio tov ovquvov ixxXriala tov d-sov, on
TtQioTov fiEv yiyQanTdi ro xaxa tov tcots TsXdvrjv, vareqav Ss anoGTokov
IriGov XqiGTov MaT&aiov, iuSsScDKOTa a-vTO roig dno 'lovSaiGiio'S ni-
GrivGaGi, yQa(iiiaGiv'E^Qa'Cxole GvvTstayjiivov Ss-vrsQav Ss to xard Mdq-
xov, ag nhgog vcptjy^GaTO dvzm, woujffavra, oV xai vlov iv tij xwd-o-
hxf] erciaToX-rj Sid to^vtuv ap,ol6yriGs cpdexmv 'Aand^sxai ¦vp.ag ij Iv
Ba^vkavi GvvExXsxTt), xai MaQxog 6 viog fiou. xai tqItov to xard Aov-
xav , TO vno HavXov inawo'vpsvov svayyshov , TOig dno rav i&vav ns-
not'Tjxota- inl nuGi to xard 'ladvvrjv.
Kat iv T<j) 7T£fi7tT(^ di twv elg to xaTci 'Iwdvvrjv^ i^rjyrjTinwv,
0 avTog Tama rceQi twv iniaToXiav twv ctnoGTo'koiv (p\aiv'
O Ss ixavm&ilg Sidxovog ysvsed-ai T-rjg xaivrjg Siad-^x-rig, ov y^dfi-
jiarog , akXa nvcvpaTog, IlavXog' 6 nEnkfjQaxdg to E'vayyiXiov ano
2* The conclusion is hopelessly unintelligible.
' to? h Ttapodo'cei (jiaSuv seem to be the words of Origen. The meaning
ascribed by Euseb. to TiapaSoot? may be seen H. E. III. 25. See the following
extract. ' From Origen in Joann. v. 3.

THE CANON OP OEIGEN. 9
IiQOVGaXTjH "*'' xvxXa psxQit tov 'IXXyQixo-S, o-vSe ndaaig 'dyqatpsv alg
ESida^Ev sxxXriaiaig , dXXd xal^ aig '^yganpEV , oXiyovg Gxiyjovg snEGtciXs.
TlETQOg Ss, ECp CO olxoSop-Eixai ri XqiGtoH ExxXriGia, 175 niiXai aSov o-v
xana-)(^vaovGi, plav EniGroXrjv opoXoyovpEvriv xaraXiXomEv. "Eaxm SI xai
SsvTEQav djicpi^aXXETai ydg. Ti Ssl nsql xoij dvansGovzog inl to
Gt-^&og Xsysiv tov IriGov , laavvov , og svayyiXtov '^v xaraXsXomiv,
op,oXoyav Svvae-d-ai TOGama noisXv a o^vSe 0 x6Gp,og laqriGai sS-vvctto;
EyQa'\ps Ss xai f^v 'AnoxdXvipiv , XEXEvG-Q-slg Gian'rJGat jckI pt) yQaipai
rag rav snTci ^qovrav (pavdg. KaTaXsXoins Se xai iniSroX-riv ndvv oXi-
ymv GTiiav. "EGxa Sh xai SsviSQav xai tqItyiv Insl oi Ttavrsg cpaol
yvrjaiovg slvai Ta^utag- nXrjv o-vx slal Grixav dp,(p6isqai sxaxov.
EtL TtQog TOVToig TCEQil Trjg TTQog '^E^Qaiovg ijnaTokTjg iv %aXg
elg avTTjv '^O/.tiXiaig rama dt.ala/.i^dvsi, '
"Oti 6 ¦jiaQaxT'riQ Tijg Xi^sag tijg riQog 'E^qalovg iniGToX-rjg , ovx e-jIei
TO sv Xoyco iSiaxixov xov dnoGxoXov , opoXoytiGavxog iavxov ISimxTjv
slvai xa Xoym, xovxiaxt TJj cpQaosi , dXX' 'sGxiv iJ IniGxoX'^ Gvv&sGsi, xrjg
Xi^sag EXXyjvixaxsQa , nag 0 sniGxapsvog XQivsiv (pqaGsoog SiaipoQag,
opoXoy^Gai av. UdXiv te kv oti to; voi^jiaTa T-rjg iniOxoX-fig davpdoia
EGxi, xai oi Sevtequ rav dnoGToXixmv yQappaxav , xai xo^vxo av Gvp-
cp-riaai slvai aXij&Eg, nag 0 nqoGsyav tiJ dvayvaGsi t?j dnoGzoXixri.
TovToig fied-' stequ irciq)iqei Xeycov
'Eyd Ss dnoipaivopEvog sVnoifi av, oti Ta p.sv vovipaTa tov dno-
BToXov Igtiv, »J Se q>QdGig xai rj G^vv&EGig dnopvrjjJiovE'vaavxog xivog^
xd eiQfjpsva vno tot; SiSaGxdXov. EX rig o^iiv ExxXTjGla 'sist xa'VTTjv t^v
iniGxoXi^v ag Iltt^vXov, avxr^ siSoxtjUEixa xai inl xovxu. O'i yaq six'rj
ot aQX^iioi avSqsg ag HavXov a-ix-riv naQaSsSaxaGi. Tig Ss 0 yQai()ag
Tijv intGToX'ijv, id (jlev dXi^d-sg &E6g oiSsv. 'H Ss sig ripag cpd-aGaGa iGxo-
qia, ¦vno xivav psv Xsyovxav, ort KXi^pTjg 0 ysvopsvog iniGxonog Pa-
jxaiav 'syqaips xvp) iniGxoXriv, vno xivav Se, oxi Aovxdg 0 yQaijjag xo
E^vayysXiov xbi rag nqd^sig.
lr4lXd Tama /xiv d)de i%£TO).^
" After Ttvo; the ordinary text has Ta aTcooToXtxa , xai (oanspd axoho-^pa-
(ptjaavTO? Tct eipif)|ji.Eva x.t.X.
* The testimony of Origen in those passages is to the following books of
the N. T. : The four Gospels (with notes as to the apostolic sanction to Mark
and Luke) , the Pauline Epp. (not named in detail), the Apocalypse, 1 John,
1 Peter, and (as not accepted by all) 2 & 3 John, and 2 Peter. He refers also to

10 OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION.

5. Canon of Eusebius.
{Euseb. H. E. III. 25.)
IleQi Twv oj.io'koyovfiEviov td-eliov yqatpwv yial rc3j' {.fij
TOIO'UTCOV.
JiiiXoyov 8^ ivTav&a yevo(.iivovg dvayietpai-aiwaaadai Tctg 8rj-
liod^eiaaq zrjg '/.aivr^g diad^/t,ifjg ygacpdg.^ Kat drj Tay.TEOv iv nqio-
TOig Trp> ayiav tCov elayyeXitov TeTQa-Mvv , olg erreTat i] tCov Ilqd-
Bso)v Twv 'AnoOToXiov yqacprj. Blerd 8s Tavvrjv Tag IlavXnv %axa-
Is'/aiov srtiaToXdg, aig £^^g t^v (peQ0f.isvr[v 'iwdvvov rcQordQav, '/.at
ofioi'ag TTjv IHtqov '/.vqcotsov smaToX^^v. 'Ent TOVTOig %a-/Jisnv,
ilye q>aveirj, z-r^v '.ATtOY.dXv'ipiv 'icodvvov, neqt i]g Ta do^avTa /ara
Acts. The Epp. of James and Jude are referred to elsewhere. (See under 'James'
and 'Jude'.) His discussion of the authorship of "Hebrews" is noteworthy.
' The views of Eusebius on the Canon as a whole are in this passage. His
opinions on the Gospels (H! E. III. 24) and on the Epistles (H. E. IH. 3) are
given elsewhere. Here he seems to make two catalogues; the first dividing
l?ooks iuto three classes: o'(jioXoYOU[ji.£va , avTiXeyofiSva, vdia; the second (or ex
planatory list) adding a lower class, the deliberate forgeries published by here
tics, and scarcely giving a place to vo'Sa. To the first class belong the 4 Gospels:
the Acts : the Epp. of Paul : 1 John, 1 Peter : and (if It seem good) the Apocalypse.
To the second belong James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John. In the third the only book
of our Canon is the Apoeal. "if it seem good" so to rank it. In H. E. III. 3
(quoted afterwards) he reckons I Peter: 14 of Paul (though the Eoman Church
counts Hebrews not Pauline). Of the chief non-canonical hooks we shall treat
afterwards. The cfjioX. or accepted hooks are called in the second list aXiriSeE;,
SitXaaioi , avti)|jioXoYin[J.£'vat ¦^gixcifaS. : the avrtXeY- ^''c defined as oux ^MSiaStjxot,
aXXd xai avTiXeyoixEvai, c'fito; 61 TCapa tcXeiotoi? Tt3v £xxXif)ataaTtX(3v YiYvtoaxofJiE-
•ia.i; the third class, \io'ia, is apparently not repeated, unless it be obscurely
glanced at when he says aura? TE TaijTa? , but instead of dwelling upon it he
now adds the heretical books. By vo'Sa, however, he evidently means books that
had no right to be in the Canon whether they be, or be not, the works of the
men whose names they bear. The Acts of Paul and the Apocalypse of Peter he
probably regarded as spurious; the Shepherd of Hermas may have been really
the work of its reputed author; but all these are vo3a, uncanonical writings. See
H. E. III. 3. By some (see Credn. Gesch. § 89 and Hilg. Einl. p. 116) this Cata
logue is taken as containing two classes — the accepted and the disputed books —
the latter being subdivided according to the various grades of acceptation (or of
opposition) in the Church. By others (see Eeuss Gesch. § 314) the classes are sup
posed to be three — oVoX., avTiXey- (v63a) and Tcpo? tuv alpET. T:po(pep. Eusebius
probably did not rigidly define to himself the meaning of vo3a even in this pas
sage: and elsewhere (H. E. II. 23) he says the Ep. of James voSEUETat, and ex
plains that both James and Jude have few primitive testimonies in their fav
our. In the same way he elsewhere calls Clem. Ep. I. to the Corr. dfJioX., i.e.,
undoubtedly Clement's work ; but avTiX. as far as canonicity is concerned (H. E.
III. 16, 38. VI. 13).

CANON OP EUSEBIUS. 11
v.aiqhv ixdrjOOfieda. Kat Tama /.isv iv 6/.ioXoyov/.isvoig. Twv 8'
avTiXeyofiEviov , yvoQi/nov 8' ovv o^wwg To7g noXXolg, r] XeyofisvY]
lavM^ov (piqsTai xat fj 'lovSa, rj ts IIstqov 8evTsqa hriGToXrj, '/.dl
Tf ovof.ial^Of.iavrj 8EVTiQa xat tqittj 'iwdvvov, eYte tov EvayyeXiOTOv
Tvy%dvovaai , eue '/.at stsqov oi.twn'-fiov i'/eivoj.^ 'Ev Totg vod-oig
'/aTaTETdxi)co '/at twv IlavXov nqd^ewv ^ yqacp-q, o Te Xsy6/.iEvog
IIoii.njv, '/at r] arco'/dXvipig TIstqov, '/at rcQog TOVTOig yj q>EQOf.isvrj
Baqvdpa iniaToXTj, '/at rwv drcoaToXwv al Xsyo/.tEvai 8i8axal' etl
Te, wg scprjv, f] 'iwavvov 'u47toyMXvipig, el cpaveii], r/vTiveg, wg scprjv,
dOeTovaiv, steqoi 8e iy/Qivovai To2g biioXoyov/isvoig. "H8rj 8s iv
TOVTOig TLvig '/at to '/a&' 'EPqaiovg svayyeXiov ^ -/.aisXe^av , ip /nd-
Xiaza '^Ej^qalwv ol tov Xqiotov rcaQa8e^df.tEvoi yaiqovai. Tavra
8s Ttavva zwj' avTiXEyof.tEVWv av e'i-tj. .Avay/aiwg 8i '/at toutwv
o/.twg TOV '/aTaXoynv iTe7toirj(.ieda, 8ia'/qivavTeg Tag Te '/UTa tvv
{¦/•/Xr^ataGTi'/'rjv 7caqd8naiv dXiq&Elg '/at drrXaGTOvg '/at avw/ioXoyr]-
f.ievag yqacpdg, '/at Tag aXXcog naqd Tamag, ov-/ iv8iad-r'f/ovg /.isv,
aXXd '/at avTiXeyofiivag , o/.iwg 8e jcaqd rcXsiaTOig twv i'/'/Xrjaia-
OTi'/wv yiyvwa'/ofisvag , iv' slSivai syoi/isv amdg te TaiJTag, '/at
Tag ovofiaTL Twr anoaToXwv nqog twj' alqsTi'/wv 7iqocpeqof.isvag,
YjToi wg JIsTqov, '/at Qw/id, '/at Mardia, r} '/at Tivwv rcaqd to-v-
Tovg aXXwv svayyeXia nsqiExovaag, wg '.AvSqsov, '/at 'Iwavvov, ~/at
Tiov dXXwv airoOToXwv rrqa^eig, wv ov8sv oi8a/.iwg iv avyyqd/uf.iaTi
TWJ' '/azd Tag 8ia8oxdg i'/'/XrjaiaaTi'/wv Tig avrjq sig (.iv^/iii^v dya-
yeiv rj^lwaev. Jlo^qto 8e nov '/at o Trjg cpqdaewg naqd to -rjd-og to
dnoOToXi'/ov ivaXXoTTEL xaqa'/Ti^q ' rj te yvw(.ir^ '/at 7] twv iv amolg
q)Bqof.iivwv nqoaiqeaig, nXeXazov (iaov Trjg aXrjO-ovg oqd-o8o^iag
dTtdSovaa, oti 8rj alqeTi'/wv dv8qwv dvanXda (.laxa Tvyxdvei, aa-
<pwg jvaqiOTrjaiv odev ov8' iv vodoig amd '/aTaxa'/Tsov , dXX' wg
OLTOna ndvTrj '/at 8vaaE^rj naqaiTrjTsov. "Iw/iev 8'rj Xomov '/at int
T^Tjv s^rjg iGToqlav.
2 See Euseb. H. E. III. 39 ; and Introduction to this work for notice of ' Pres
byter John.'
* See ' Gospel of Hebrews, ' ivfra.

12 OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION.

6. CoDEX Vaticanus (Cod. B).
Probably the oldest MS of the N. T. and certainly dating from
as early a time as the beginning of the fourth century. Its want
of the Ammonian sections and Eusebian Canons seems to point
to a date before Eusebius brought these into vogue ;i and the
.form of its letters and pecuhar readings tend to the same result.
It is unfortunately defective from Heb. ix. 14. Its Books of the
N. T. (it has the 0. T. complete save parts of Genesis and Psalms)
are Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, James, Peter (2), John (3),
Jude, Romans, Corinthians (2), Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians,
Colossians, Thessalonians (2), Hebrews ....
7. Codex Sinaiticus (Cod. n),
discovered by Tischendorf in the convent of St Catharine on
Mount Sinai, and pubhshed in 1862, contains (in addition to
much of the 0. T.) the New Testament as in our Canon in the
following order: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Romans, Corinthians (2),
Galatians, Ephesians, Phihppians, Colossians, Thessalonians (2),
Hebrews, Timothy (2), Titus, Philemon, Acts, James, Peter (2),
John (3), Apocalypse.
Immediately after the Apocalypse, beginning on the same
page with its conclusion, is the Epistle of Barnabas complete,
followed by a considerable portion of the Shepherd of Hermas.
The paging of the original sheets shows that some leaves of the
MS which came between Barnabas and Hermas are lost. This
MS dates from about the middle of the fourth century. It has
been supposed that it may be one of the 50 copies prepared by
Eusebius at the order of the Emperor Constantine, but there are
objections to this view.
' See Tischendorf's reasoning against this conclusion, Cod. Vat. XXX. (1867).

CANON OF ATHANASIUS. 13

8. Canon of Athanasius.^
{Athan. 0pp. Tom. II. p. 38.)
'E'/ Trjg Xd-' soqTaGTi'/rjg iniGToXijg. A.D. 365.
.AXX inEi8r] neqt piv twv alqsTi'/wv if.ivrjGdrji.iEv, tSg VE'/qwv,
nsqt 8e rjfiwv wg ixovTwv nqog owxriqiav Tag d-Eiag yqacpdg' '/at
(pojiovfiai firjnwg, wg syqaxpev Koqivdioig IlavXog, oXiyoi twv d'/e-
qauov and T'^g dnXoTrjrog '/at T'fjg dyvoTrjTog jtXavrjd-wGiv dno Trjg
' The Alexandrian Church was the most learned in the world, especially
learned in Astronomy; and the Council of Nioaea imposed on its bishop as a duty
to determine for Christendom (as it had been his custom to determine for his
own diocese) the exact day for the celebration of each successive Easter. The
result of the reckoning was not only published to all the towns aud monasteries
within the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Alexandria, but was also made known to
the Western Church through the Bishop of Eome, and to the Syrian Church through
the Bishop of Antioch. By fixing the date of Easter, this yearly Epistle fixed
the dates of all the Christian festivals of the year. From an early period the
^ letters had been of growing repute as Episcopal Pastorals ; but the Nicene decree
made thera officially binding. Athanasius was only a Deacon when that decree
was made, but he heard it given forth, and for more than 40 years (329-373)
amid all his occupations, even in his exile, he sent his " Festal Letter " to the
Christian world. A part of one of those letters is given in the text ; and it may
be regarded as not only the opinion of Athanasius himself, but an official an
nouncement of the common conclusions of Christendom on the subject of the
Canon. He refers to the number of heretical books which were current. He points
out that they were apt to deceive because they falsely claimed names kindred to
those of the true books. The true books are fountains of salvation. He enumerates
the books of the 0. T. (Esther is omitted, and there are apocryphal additions to
Jeremiah), and his N. T. list is exactly that of our Canon, "to which no one may
add, and from which nothing may be taken away." But there are other books,
of a lower grade, which neophytes may read with profit: the Wisdom of Solomon
(often quoted by Athanasius elsewhere), Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, the Teaching
of the Apostles, and Hermas. Far below them— aud named only to be de
nounced — are the apocryphal books made by heretics, false in title and in date,
constructed to deceive the unsuspicious. Many of the books reckoned in Athana-
sius's second class were ordinarily read in churches at the time — read for in
struction, or quoted by preachers and writers — yet not as Canonical Scriptare. No
doubt, however, can be entertained that this practice led to confusion, which
Athanasius in his letter sought to reduce to order. It was not a task without
difficulty, — To'X|jiY) he calls it. He himself elsewhere quotes Hermas and the Teaching
of the Apostles, but never so as to contradict this solemn statement. We may
add that this Epistle is admitted to be genuine, and that its testimony to the
sacred books is to the same effect as all that we learn from the history of the
Nicene Council and from contemporary quotations. (See Euseb. H. E. V. 25 ; VII. 20;
Credner, Gesch. § 94.) Eusebius refers to Dionysius's letters (VII. 20. 22) and
quotes largely from them, showing the high esteem in which they were held. The
Festal letters seem to have been collected for reference and use from the very
first; those of Dionysius, Athanasius, Theophilus, and Cyril being specially me
morable. This by Athanasius does not exist in full, but the part on the Canon

14 OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECTION.
navovqyiag rwr avdqwnwv '/at Xomov ivTvyxdvEiv sTsqoig aq^wv-
Ttti To7g Xeyofiivoig ano'/qvcpoig, dnaTWfievni -cfj wfiovvfiia tc5»'
dXrjdivwv ^i§Xiwv naqa'/aXw dvexeodai, el nsqt wv iniGTaGd-E,
neqt toijtwv '/dyw fiWjfiovE'vwv yqdcpw, 8id te Trjv dvdy/tjv '/at to
Xq^iGifiov Trjg i'/'/XrjGiag. MsXXwv 8i tovtwv firnjfioveveiv, xqi]O0fiat
nqog G-vGTaaiv Trjg ifiavTov ToXfir^g t^i xonit) tov evayyeXiGTOv
ylov/d, Xsywv '/at avvog' inei8^nEq Tivig ineyelqrjGav dvaTd^a-
adai savTolg tu Xeyofieva dno/qvcpa, '/at inifd^ai tuvtu Trj deo-
nvEVGTi)) yqacprj, nsqt fjg inXricpoqrjdrjftsv , '/ad cog naqs8oGav Toig
narqdoiv ol an aq'xrjg avTonTai '/at -hnrjqsTai yevoftevoi tov Xoyov
s8o§e '/dfiot TcqoTqanivTi naqd yvrjGiwv dSeXcpwv, xat fiad-ovri
dvwdev, l^ijg i'/dsodai Ta '/avoviCofieva xat 7taqa8odsvTa, niGTEv-
dsiTa TE dela eivai ^i^Xia' iva s'/aotog, el fisv rjnaxiqdrj, '/utu-
yvcjj Twj' nXavrjOdvTwv b 8s xadaqog 8iafiEivag, X'^^QH ndXiv vno-
fiifivrjG'/ofievog. 'Egti Toivvv Trjg fiiv n:aXaiag 8iadi^'/rjg ^i^Xia to) aqid-fiij) Ta
ndvva eIxogi8vo' TOGctma ydq, wg'y'f/ovaa, '/at to GTOixEia ra
Tcaq' 'E3qaioig eivai naqa8s8oTai. T-fj 8i TdSei '/at tii) ovofiuTi
ioTiv s'/aGTOv ovTwg' nqwrov FsveGig, eiTa'E^o8og, eiTa yieviTi-
'/6v, '/at fieTa tovto 'u4qidfiot, '/at Xoinov to AevTeqovofiiov. 'E§^g
8s ToiJTOig iGTtv 'irjGovg 6 tov Navrj, '/at KqiTai. Kat fiexd tovto
rj Povd. Kat ndXiv s^rjg BaGiXeiwv TSGoaqa §i§Xia' -/at tovtcov
TO fiiv nqwTOV -/at 8Emeqov elg sv ^ijSXiov dqidfieiTai' to 8i TqiTOV
'/at TtTaqrov oftolwg elg sv fiSTa 8s Tama JJaqaXemOfisvcov a' xat
^', bfiolwg elg ev §i§Xiov dqidfiovfisva' eiTa 'Ea8qag a' xat /?'
bfwiwg elg 'iv, fieTu 8s Tama ^l^Xog WaXfiwv, '/at s§rjg Jlaqoi-
fiiai' eiTa'E'/'/XriGiaGT^Tjg, '/at ^.Aofia dafiaTWv. Ilqdg Tomoig egti
'/at 'lio§, '/at Xomov IlqocprJTaf ol fiiv 8oj8e'/a elg ev §i^Xiov
dqidfiQ-vfiEvoi. EiTa "^Haatag, "^IsqEfiiag, xat gvv ami^ Baqoiix,
Qqrjvoi, 'EniGToXrj, '/at fiev' amov 'is^e'/iijX '/.at Aavii^X. ".Axqi tov
tcov Ta Trjg TtaXaidg 8iad-rjY.i]g iGTarai.
is frequently quoted. Of the greater part of it a Syriac translation was found along
with other Festal letters in the Nitrian MSS in the British Museum. There is a
German Translation of the Festal Letters by Larsow (1852), a Latin one by Mai
(1854), and an English one (1854) "Library of Fathers." Athanasius appears to
have written 45 letters; and most of those which have come down to us
contain not only instructions as to their proper subject, but also (prefixed to
the paragraph containing the computation) exhortations to steadfastness in Christian
doctrine and practice. The text is after Migne's Edition (1857), vol. ii. p. 1436.
See there the prefatory account, p. 1339 (after Mai).

SYNOPSIS ASCRIBED TO ATHANASIUS. 15
Ta 8e Trjg -/aivrjg ndXiv oi'/ o'/vrjziov einelv son ydq TavTa.
EvayysXia TSGGaqa' '/azd MaTdalov, '/ard Mdqxov, '/aTd ylovxav,
'/ard Iwdvvrjv. EiTa fiSTd zama Uqd^eig '.^inoGToXcov , '/at ini-
GToXat KadoXi'/at '/aXo-Ufisvai rwj' dnoGToXcov snTa' omcog fiiv
la'/co^Qv a', TIsTqov 8i §' , eha 'Iwdvvov y' , '/at fieTa Tavzag
Ioij8a a'. Ilqdg Tomoig Ua-vXov dnoGToXov elotv iniOToXat 8e'/a-
TSGGaqEg, Tfj Td^ei yqacpofievai omwg' nqcoTr] nqog '^Pcofiaioug'
eiTa nqog Koqivdiovg 8vo' '/at fieTa rama nqog FaXdTog' "/at
E^^g nqog 'EcpEOio-cg' eiTa nqog WiXinnrjGiovg '/at nqog KoXaG-
aaelg- '/at fieTa Tamag nqog QeGoaXovixelg 8vo' '/at fj nqog
"E^qaiovg ' xat ei'^t'g nqog fiiv Tiftodsov 6-vo' nqog 8s TiTOV fiia'
'/at zEXsvzaia fj nqog (DiX-rjfiOva. Kat ndXiv 'Iwdvvov '.Ano'/dXvipig.
Tama nrjyat tov GcoTrjqiov, wote tov 8iipw7'Ta twv iv Tomoig
ificpoqslGdai Xoyicov iv zo-vzoig fiovoig to Trjg EvGB^Eiag 8i8aG'/a-
Xeiov EvayyeXl^Ezai. MrjSstg TO'uzoig sni^aXXsTW firjdi tovtwv
acpaiqEiGdw ti. Usql 8i tov-icov b K-vqiog ^a88ov'/aiovg fiiv i8v-
Gcunst, Xsycov "UXavdode frrj el86Teg Tag yqacpdg." ToXg 8i 'lov-
8aioig naq-fjvei' "'EqsvvavE Tag yqacpdg' oti amai sioi al fiaqTV-
qnvaai neqt ifiov." '^XX svsxd ys nXsiovog d'/qi^eiag nqoGrid-rjfu
8'rj Tovzo yqdcpwv avay/aiwg- wg oti gffTt '/at ETsqa §i§Xia tov
twv e'^w^^sv, ov '/avovi^ofieva fiiv, TETvncofiiva 8s naqd Tciiv na-
Tsqwv dvayivcoG'/EGdat Tolg dqTi 7cqogeqxofisvoig '/at (iooXofiivoig
'/aTtjxelGdai tov Trjg evGe^eiag Xoyov 2ocpia ^oXofiwvTog, '/at 2o-
cpia 2iqdx, '/at 'Eod ¦^q, '/at Iov8id, '/at Tio^iag, '/at AiSa'/j^ '/a-
XovfiivTj TWV 'udnoGToXcov , '/at b Uoifn^v. Kat ofiwg dyantjTot,
'/d'/eivwv '/avoviZofisvwv , '/at tovtwv avayivwG'/ofisvwv , ovSafiov
TWV dno'/q-vcpcov fivrjfirj' dXXd alqsTi'/wv sgtiv snivoia, yqacpovTwv
fiiv OTE deXovaiv amd, Yftqil^Qfiivwv 8i '/at nqogzidsvzwv amolg
xqovovg, iv' wg naXaid nqocpaqovTsg, nqocpaGiv sx<^aLv dnaTav ix
TOVTOv TOvg dxsqaiovg,
9. Synopsis ascribed to Athanasius. ^
Ilaaa yqacprj fjfiwv XqiGTiavwv, deonvevGTog iariv. Ovx ao-
qiGTa Si, dXXd fidXXov wqiGfteva '/at XE'/avoviOfisva e'xei tu ^i^Xia.
1 This Synopsis is not regarded as genuine. It is not mentioned by any
ancient author as the work of Athanasius. Jerome is silent upon it. It does not
agree in its list of books either of the Old Testament or of the New with those

16 OLDEST TESTIMONIES TO A COLLECnON.
Kat EGTI r^g fiiv IlaXaiag Aiadi^/rjg Tama' .... [Here follow
the Books of the 0. T. including the Apocrypha (which however are
distinguished as fi^rj '/avovit^ofiEva), and making two of Esdras.]
Td 8i Trjg Kaivrjg Aiadrj'/rjg, ndXiv wqiGfisva te '/at xexavoviGfisva
§i§Xia, Tama- (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Seven Ca
tholic Epp., Paul's Epp. 14 in number [Hebrews being named
before the Pastoral Epp.], Apocalypse.) Toaama '/at Td Trjg
Kaivrjg Aiad^ijxrjg ^i^Xia Td ye '/avoviCofieva , xat Trjg niGzewg
fjfiwv olovet a'/qodivia rj ay/vqai '/at iqeiGfiaTU' log naq' amwv
TWV anoGToXcov tov XqiGTOv, twv '/at avyyevofiivwv ixeivc^ '/at
vn' a^vTOv fiadrjTsvdsvTwv , yqacpsvTa '/at ixvedsvTa. 'Enet tol ys
vGTsqov '/aTa T-rjv i'/elvwv d'/oXovdiav '/at avficpwviav aXXa fivqia
'/at dvaqidfirjTa ^i§Xia i^snovijdrjGav vno twv '/aTa '/aiqovg fieyd-
Xcov '/at GOcpwTUTWv dsocpoqwv JlaTsqcov sig fiaqTvqiav twv nqo-
Xa^ovTcov '/at SiacpdriGiv nsqt thv ov viiv Xoyog, wg nafinoXXwv
xat doqiGTwv, '/at a fia ndvTWv Tijg am^g dxoXovdiag TOig na-
Xaiolg TO^vTOig ixofisvwv, xat Ta amd i^rjyovfisvwv '/at amwv '/at
8iaGacpovvTwv. (Then follow detailed notices of the several books
of Scripture, after which the author speaks of the Apocrypha
and says), T-rjg Niag ndXiv Aiad-rf/tjg dvTiXeyofieva Tama' Ile-
qioSoi IIsTqov, JlsqioSoi 'Iwdvvov, IlEqioSoi Qwfid, EvayysXiov
xaTa Qwfid, Ai8ayjj dnoGToXiov , KXrjftivTia, i^ cbv fiSTecpqdad-rj-
Gav i-/XeysvTa to dXijdsGTsqa '/at deonvevGTa. Tama Ta dva-
yivwG'/ofiEva. Tama ndvTa i^EzsdrjGav fiiv oGov nqog sl'SrjGiv, naqays-
yqafifiiva 8i slot ndvTwg '/at voda, '/at dno^XrjTa. Kat ov8iv
TOVTWV, TWV dno'/q-vcpwv fidXiGTa, s'yxqiTOv 'ij inwcpsXig, i^aiqsTwg
Trjg Nsag Aiadirj/ijg • dXXd ndvTa 8ixa twv dvwTsqw 8iaXrjcpd-evTav,
'/at iyxqidsvvwv naqd Tolg naXaidig Gocpolg '/at nuTqaoiv, ano-
'/qvcprjg fiaXXov ij dvayvtoGEwg wg dXrjdwg a^ia' Ta ts aXXa, '/at
amd Ta '/aXovfieva iv amdig EvayysXia, i'/Tog twv naqaSodivTwv
fjfiiv TSGGaqwv tovtwv. EvayysXia ydq TsGGaqa idianiaav fjfiiv
given in the previous extract from the Paschal letter. Among other points of
difference we may notice that the Synopsis does not mention Hermas, and does
mention the Clementines — in both respects being the opposite of the Festal Letter.
It has been attempted to find an allusion to this in a passage in Athanasius,
"Apologia ad Constantium Imp.," p. 236, when he speaks of sending ituxTia tuv
Ssitiiv yprj.tfi(S\. But TcuxTta cannot mean a Synopsis. (See Migne, Proleg. p. CLXXVI.)
The Synopsis is supposed to be as late as the 9th century. The text is abridged
from Migne, vol. iv. p. 283, &c.

CANON OP THE LAODICENE COUNCIL. 17
ol Isqot -/avoveg T^g dylag '/adoXi'/rjg '/at dnoGToXixrjg'E'/'/XijGiag'
TO xaTa MaTdaiov t, to xard Maq'/ov, to xaTd .Aov/dv, '/at to
'/azd Iwdvvrjv, xaTa t^v nqocprjxsiav Tijg onTaGiag, ijg idsdaazo
Isl^ExifjX b jcqocpiqcrjg neqt twv TeGGaqwv Xeqov^ifi. TsGGaqa ydq
e18e Xsqov^tfi ovzog b nqoqtiffirjg' to tv Ofioiov dvdqwncp, tovtsgtl
TO xaTa Mazddiov EvayysXiov to 8eijTeqov ofioiov fioGXc^, TovziaTL
TO '/aTa Midq'/ov EvayysXiov to dXXo ofioiov Xsovti, tovtsgtl
TO '/aTa yiov/dv EvayysXiov • to 8e TSTaqTov ofioiov dsTCj), tovtsgtl
TO "/azd 'ladvvYjv EvayysXiov. TIaqd 8i Tama Td TsGGaqa szsqov
E'vayyiXiov ov8ev.
Td fiiv ovv '/azd MaTdaiov EvayysXiov iyqdcprj vn avTov tov
BlaTdaiov Ttj 'E^qat8i 8iaXs'/Tci) , '/at i^sSodrj iv '^leqovGaXfjfi , fjq-
firjVEvdrj 8i vnd'la'/io^ov TOV dSeXcpov tov Kvqiov to '/aTa adq'/a,
og '/at nqwTog ixeiqoTovrp-rj iniGxonog vno twv dyiwv dnoGToXwv
EV 'leqoGoX-vfioig. Td 8i xaTa Maq'/ov EvayysXiov vnrjyoqsvdrj fiiv vno JIsTqov
TOV dnoGzdXov, iv^Ptofrrj, i^e86drj 8i vnd Mdq'/ov zov fia'/aqiov
dnoGzdXov , '/at i'/ijq-vxdrj vn' amov iv '.AXe^avSqeicx '/at iv .Al-
yvnTCjj, '/at iv HEVTanoXsi, xat .Ai^vjj.
Td 8i '/aTd .Aovxdv EvayysXiov vnrjyoqsvdrj fiiv vnd IlavXov
ToiJ anoGToXov , Gvveyqdcprj 8i '/at i§e86drj vnd ytov/d tov fia'/a
qiov dnoGToXov '/at laTqov' oigneq "/at Ilqd^eig Twv'-AnoGToXwv
vnrjyoqevGE fiiv bfioiiog Jlhqog b dnoGToXog, GvvsyqdipaTO 8s b
avTog ylovxdg.
Td 8i '/aTa 'Iwdvvrjv EvayysXiov vnrjyoqs-vdrj te vn amov tov
ay iov 'iwdvvov tov dnoGToXov '/at -rjyanrjfisvov , ovTog i^oqiGzov iv
IldTfic^ TJj vrjGit), '/at vnd tov avzov i^e86drj iv 'EcpsGij), 8id Falov
TOV dyanrjrov '/at §evo86xov twv dnoGToXcov , nsqt oil xat IlavXog
"^Pwfiaioig yqdcpwv cprjai' '-AGndt^STai vfidg Fatog 6 §svog fiov '/at
oXrjg T^g 'E'A'/XrjGiag.

18 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
II.
TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
1. Canon of the Laodicene Council a.d. 364.^
Canons LIX, LX.
"Oti ov del l8iwTr/ovg xpaXftovg Xiysadai iv tij h/'/XrjGiq, ov8i
a'/avoviGTa (ii^Xia, dXXd fiova Td '/avovi'/d Trjg '/aivfjg '/at naXaidg
8iadij'/rjg. — "Oaa 8eT. §i^Xia dvayivcoaxeadai Trjg naXaidg 8ia-
drj'/rjg' a' Fiveaig '/oGfiov, ^ 'E^o8og i^ .AlyvnTov, y ytsvizi'/dv,
8' '.Aqidfiot, e' AEvzsqovofiiov , g 'irjGOvg Navrj, ^' Kqizat, Povd,
rj 'Eadrjq, d' BaaiXsiwv nqurcij -/at 8£VTeqa, i BaaiXsiwv Tqlvrj
'/at TEzdqTYj, la FlaqaXeinofieva nqwrov '/at Ssvreqov, t/?' 'Ea8qag
nqwTov '/at Ssmsqov, ly (ii^Xog ^'aXfiwv I'/azdv nEvzij/ovza,
id' Jlaqoifiiai ^oXofiwvTog, is' 'E'/'/XrjOiaaT'rjg, ig .Aofiu dafidzwv,
ill,' Itt)^, irj 8ii8E'/a Uqocpfjzac, id' "^Haatag, '/ '^leqEfiiag '/at Ba-
qoisx, Qqrjvot '/at'EniazoXat, '/u'IeCe'/i-tX, •/^' AavirjX. — Td 8i
T^g '/ai-VTjg 8iadrj/rjg Tama' EvayysXia Tsaaaqa, '/azd MaTdaiov,
"/aTd Mdq/ov, "/aTd ytov/dv, xaTd 'Uodwrjv • Ilqd^Eig '.AnoaroXiov,
EniOToXat KadoXr/at snTd omwg' 'la'/w^ov a', IIsTqov a'/?', 'iw
dvvov j3'y', 'Iov8a a'' 'EniGToXat Ha'vXov Ss'/aTsaaaqEg ' nqog '^Pco-
fia'iovg a', nqdg Koqivdiovg a'^', nqdg FaXdTag a, nqdg 'EcpEGiovg
a', nqdg OiXmnrjaiovg a', nqdg KoXoaaasTg a', nqdg QsaaaXovi-
'/slg a'p', 7tqdg '^E^qaiovg a , nqdg Tifiodsov a'/?', nqdg Tltov a',
nqdg OiXijfiova a'.^
* The Synod of Laodicea about A.D. 360 was only a local, probably an
Arian, Synod, attended by 20 or 30 bishops from Lydia and Phrygia. The 59*
Canon (oti ou Set .... 8ia3i]XY);) is genuine; but the Catalogue which follows
is now generally admitted to be the work of a later age. It will be observed
that the Apocalypse is omitted. The decree was confirmed by the Quinisextine
(Trullan) Council of Constantinople A.D. 692, and again by the Council of Jeru
salem A.D. 1G72, which, after the commotion caused by Cyril Lukar, endeavoured
to settle the Canon. The Trullan Council based the acceptance of Scripture on
the decrees of the Councils of Carthage and Laodicea, and on the writings of
certain faithers. There was no special legate of Eome at the Counoil, although
the ordinary representatives of the Bishop of Eome were present; and the Eoman
Church does not recognize all its decrees as binding. The same Council which
accepted the decrees of Carthage and Laodicea, accepted also the "Apostolical
Canons". * From Westcott's text. See his interesting history of the text : Canon of
N. T., 3r4 ed., p. 400. See also Hilg. Einl., p. 119. Credner, Gesch. d. N. T. Ka
non, 245. Bruns, Can. Apost. et Concil. Saec, IV-VII. p. 77.

canon op cyeil op jerusalem. 19
2. Canon of Cyril of Jerusalem.^
Catechis. IF, p. S& ff.
nsqt Tt5v d-eiitjv yqacpwv.
Tama 8i 8i8da'/ovGiv fjfidg al deonvevazoi yqacpat Tijg na
Xaidg TS xat xaivfjg 8iadrj/rjg. Elg ydq ioTiv b tiov 8vo 8ia&7j-
"/cUv Qedg, b Tdv iv tjj '/(tivfj cpavsvva XqiGTdv iv tij naXaiq nqo-
xaTuyyeiXag, b 8 id vofiov -/at nqocprjTwv elg XqiGTdv nai8ayw-
yrjaag. Tlqd ydq too iXdsiv T^rjv nlariv, vnd vofiov icpqovqo-vfisda,
'/at 0 vofiog nai8aywydg fjfiwv ysyovev elg Xqicfzov. Kdv noTe
TCOV alqsTi'/wv d'/ovaijg Tivdg ^Xaacprjfiovvzog vdfiov '-rj nqocpfjzag,
dvTicpdey^ai T-fjv awTrjqiav cpwvrjv Xsywv • Oi)'/ ijXdsv 'IijGovg '/aza-
Xvaai TOV vofiov, aXXd nXijqwaai. Kat cpiXofiadwg iniyvwdc naqd
TTjg ix'/XrjGiag, nolai fisv elaiv al Ttjg naXaiag 8iadrj'/rjg ^i^Xoi,
noXav 8s Trjg xaivrjg' '/ai fioi fiijSiv twv d^co'/q-vcpwv dvayivcoo'/e.
'0 ydq Td naqd ndaiv bfioXoyovjieva firj el8iog, tl neqt Td dfi-
cpi^aXXofisva TaXainwqsig fioTrjv; '^vayivcoG'/e Tag dsiag yqacpdg,
Tag e'lxoai 8vo §i§Xovg Trjg 7iaXaidg 8iadrp/rjg Tag vnd twv e^8o-
fitjXovTa 8vo sqfiTjVSvTwv sqfirjvevdeiaag  Tijg
8i '/aivrjg 8iadrjxrjg, Td Tsaaaqa EvayysXia' Ta 8i Xomd ipevS-
eniyqacpa xat §Xa^eqd Tvyxdvei. "Eyqaipav '/at MavixdloL '/aTa
Qwfidv EvayysXiov, onsq, diansq £vw8iq Trjg svayysXixrjg nqoaw-
wfiiag, SiacpdeiqEi Tag xpvxdg twv dnXovGTsqwv. Asxov 8i xat
Tag Ilqd^sig twv 8oj8E'/a dnoaToXwv nqdg Tomoig 8i "/at Tag
e^fTa 'la"/tjjiov "/at FIsTqov 'iwdvvov '/at 'lov8a KadoXixdg Eni-
GToXdg' iniacpqdyiGfia 8i twv ndvTWv "/at fiadrjTwv to TsXev-
Tatov, Tag IlavXov SexaTsaaaqag iniOToXag. Td 8i Xomd ndvTa
E^w 'xeiadw sv 8evTsqcj). Kat oaa fiiv iv i'/'/XrjGiaig fifj dvayi-
vioo'/eTai, Tama firj8s '/ard aavTov dvayivwa'/s, xadtUg ^'/ovGag.
Kat jieqt fiiv tovtwv, Tama.^
1 Cyril died A.D. 386. It will be observed that he includes without hesi
tation in his N, T. all the books save the Apocalypse. Those which Eusebius
a few years before had described as Antilegomeua seem in the interval to have
been accepted by all. Cyril founds his statements on the general agreement to
which the Church had come ; and appeals from local or individual peculiarities to
that general consent. There is in the closing words a reference to some books
that may be read in some Churches but are only fitted for the "second rank;"
and others not read in Churches at all are to be avoided by the private reader.
* The Apocalypse must be in this second rank. Even in treating of Anti
christ elsewhere Cyril does not quote the Apocalypse. 2 *

20 testimonies to the canon.
3. Canon of the Third Council of Carthage a.d. 397.^
Canon XL FII.
2 Item placuit, ut praeter scripturas canonicas nihil in ec
clesia legatur sub nomine divinarum scripturarum. Sunt autem
canonicae scripturae: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri, Deute-
ronomium, Jesus Nave, Judicum, Ruth, Regnorum libri quatuor,
Paralipomenon hbri duo, Job, Psalterium Davidicum, Salomonis
libri quinque, libri duodecira Prophetarum, Jesaias, Jeremias, Eze
chiel, Daniel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Esdrae libri duo, Macha-
baeorum libri duo. Novi autem Testamenti Evangeliorum libri
quatuor, Actuum Apostolorum liber unus, Epistolae Pauli apo
stoli tredecim, ejusdem ad Hebraeos una, Petri apostoli duae,
Joannis ap. tres, Judae ap. una, Apocalypsis Joannis liber unus.
Hoc etiam fratri et consacerdoti nostro Bonifacio ^ vel aliis earum
> Prom Bruns, p. 133.
2 Between A.D. 390 and A.D. 419 six Councils were held in Africa, four
of them in Carthage (Bruns 111-151). This — the third of those — was held under
the presidency of Aurelius, Bp. of Carthage. Augustine (as Bishop of Hippo) was
present. So far as we know , it was the first Council of the Christian Church
which enumerated the Books of N. T. Scripture; for although the Laodicene De
cree (given above) is earlier, the genuine portion does not contain the Catalogue.
It was not a general Council ; it was only a local Council, attended hy 44 Bishops,
all of whom subscribed the decree. It is not therefore an authoritative utterance
of the general Church. Its decree was not confirmed by any larger Council till
A.D. 692, when the Trullan Council (see note on Laodicene Decree) accepted it
for the Eastern Church. In the Western Churoh more than 1000 years passed
before the unfinished task of defining the Canon was resumed ; and even then
(A.D. 1435) it was the solitary voice of a Pope (Eugenius) which proclaimed its
completion. Nearly 1200 years passed before a general Council (Trent) made a
decree on the subject, and its conclusions were much less accurate than those of
the little gathering in Carthage. The acceptance of a Canon of the N. T. does
not rest on the authority of the corporate Church. And it is not as to an Eccle
siastical authority that we look back to the Council of Carthage; but we find in
its decree a statement of a well-ascertained fact — the general agreement of the
Church as to the nature and number of the Books of Canonical Scripture. The
decree bears on the face of it that the question was as to what should be read
in Churches; and that the answer was: Canonical Scripture aloue, save that on
Days of the Saints the histories of their Martyrdoms might be read in addition
to the Canon. To prevent ambiguity, the names of the Books denoted "Canonical
Scripture" are added.
° This reference to Boniface is supposed by some to have been originally a,
marginal note which in course of time found its way into the text. Boniface was
not Bishop of Rome at the time of the Council. It is supposed that when the
African Canons were collected into one Code, this passage was a reference to him
aud other representatives of foreign Churches, not intended to be taken as part of
the original decree. There are various readings, Consacerdoti, Coepiscopo, &o., in
his name, intimating that liberties were taken with the designation of Boniface.

CANON OF EPIPHANIUS. CANON OP JEROME. 21
partium episcopis pro confirmando isto canone innotescat, quia a
patribus ista accepimus in ecclesia legenda. Liceat enim legi pas-
siones martyrum, cura anniversarii dies eorum celebrantur.
4. Canon of Epiphanius.^
Haeres. Tom. I. p. 941.
El ydq -fjg i^ aylov nvevfiaTog yeysvvrjfisvog, xat nqocpifjTaig
'/at dnoGToXoig fisfiadrjzevfisvog , s'8eL as 8isXd6vTa an' dqx^g
yevsaewg xoGfiov dxqi twv Tijg .Aladijq 'xqovcov, iv ei'/oGL xat snTd
§i§Xoig naXaidg 8iadrf/rjg, s'l'/oai (Jwo dqidfiovfisvoig, TSTzaqai
8i dyioig EvayysXioig, "/at iv TSGGaqGi"/ai8e'/a 'EniGToXalg tov
dy'iov dnoGToXov IlavXov, "/at iv Tatg nqd to-vtwv xat avv Toig
iv Tolg amcijv xqovoig Ilqd^eGL twv 'AtnoOToXwv, KadoXi'/atg 'Eni-
GToXalg 'la'/io^ov '/at IIsTqov '/at 'icodvvov '/at 'lovSa, xat iv T-fj
TOV 'iwdvvov '.Ano'/aX'vipei, iv 8i Toig 2ocpiaig ^oXofiwvTog te
cprjfii, xat vlov ^iqdx, xat ndaaig dnXwg yqacpdig deiaig, '/at
EavTOv '/GTayvwvai otl 'ovofia onsq ov8afiov ivTSTa'/Tai -fjXdeg fjfiiv
cpsqtov, oi'/ dnqenig fiiv Qec^, dXK evae^ig elg Qedv Td tov dyev-
vijrov ovofia, firj8afiov 8i iv d-eiq yqacpfj qrjdiv.
5. Canon of Jerome.
Epist. II. ad Paulinum (0pp. T. IV. p. 574).
Tangam et Novum breviter Testamentum. Matthaeus, Mar
cus, Lucas et Joannes, quadriga Domini et verum Cherubim, quod
interpretatur scientiae multitudo, per totum corpus oculati sunt,
scintillae emicant, discurrunt fulgura, pedes habent rectos et in
sublime tendentes, terga pennata et ubique volitantia. Tenent
mutuo, et quasi rota in rota volvuntur, et pergunt quocunque eos
flatus Sancti Spiritus perduxerit.
But — assuming that the decree was in answer to a question — it may have been
some neighbouring local bishop who put the question, and whose name was
Boniface. ' Epiphanius, horn in Palestine, died bishop of Constantia in Cyprus A.D
403. His great work, Pcmaa-ium or Refutation of all Heresies, shows much learning,
but is always diffuse, and often not trustworthy where his theories come ia the
way of his historical vision. It has not borne the test of criticism and compa
rison with other authorities nearly so well as Eusebius's Eccl. Hist.

22 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
Paulus Apostolus ad septem ecclesias scribit (octava enim
ad Hebraeos a plerisque extra numerum ponitur), Timotheum in-
struit ac Titum, Philemonem pro fugitivo famulo deprecatur. Su
per quo tacere melius puto, quam pauca scribere. Actus Apo
stolorum nudam quidem sonare videntur historiam, et nascentis
ecclesiae infantiam texere: sed si noverimus scriptorem eorum
Lucam esse medicum, cujus laus est in evangelio, animadvertemus
pariter omnia verba illius, animae languentis esse medicinam.
Jacobus, Petrus, Joannes, Judas apostoli septem epistolas edide-
runt tam mysticas quam succinctas et breves pariter et longas:
breves in verbis, longas in sententiis, ut rarus sit qui non in ea
rum lectione caecutiat. Apocalypsis Joannis tot habet sacramenta,
quot verba. Parum dixi pro merito voluminis. Laus omnis in
ferior est: in verbis singulis multiplices latent intelligentiae.
6. Augustine.^
Erit igitur divinarum scripturarum solertissimus indagator,
qui primo tolas legerit notasque habuerit, et si nondum intellectu
jam tamen lectione, duntaxat eas quae appellantur Canonicae.
Nam caeteras securius leget fide veritatis instructus, ne praeoc-
cupent imbecillum animum, et periculosis mendaciis atque phan-
tasmatis eludentes praejudicent aliquid contra sanam intelligen-
tiam. In Canonicis autem Scripturis, ecclesiarum catholicarum
quamplurium auctoritatem sequatur; inter quas sane illae sint,
quae apostolicas sedes habere et epistolas accipere meruerunt.
Tenebit igitur hunc modum in Scripturis Canonicis, ut eas quae
ab omnibus accipiuntur ecclesiis Catholicis praeponat eis quas
quaedam non accipiunt: in eis vero quae non accipiuntur ab
omnibus, praeponat eas quas plures gravioresque accipiunt eis
quas pauciores minorisque auctoritatis ecclesiae tenent. Si autem
alias invenerit a pluribus, alias a gravioribus haberi, quanquam
hoc facile invenire non possit, aequalis tamen auctoritatis eas
1 Aug., De Doctrina Christiana, II. 12. 13. Augustine was Bishop of Hippo,
born A.D. 354, died A.D. 430. His opinion on Canonicity is not so valuable as
his contemporary Jerome's. But in his voluminous writings he shows not only his
own opinion but the views current in his time. He accepted the received Canon
of the New Testament. He had doubts as to the authorship of Hebrews, but none
as to its Canonicity.

AUGUSTINE. CHRYSOSTOM. COD. ALEX. 23
habendas puto. Totus autem Canon Scripturarum in quo istam
considerationem versandam dicimus, his libris continetur.
[Here follow the Books of the 0. T.]
Novi autem, quatuor libris Evangelii, secundum Matthaeum,
secundum Marcum, secundum Lucam, secundum Joannem; qua-
tuordecim Epistolis Pauli Apostoli, ad Romanos, ad Corinthios
duabus, ad Galatas, ad Ephesios, ad Philippenses, ad Thessalo
nicenses duabus, ad Colossenses, ad Timotheum duabus, ad Ti
tum, ad Philemonem, ad Hebraeos ; Petri duabus ; tribus Joannis ;
una Judae et una Jacobi; Actibus Apostolorum libro uno, et
Apocalypsi Joannis libro uno.
In his omnibus libris timentes Deum et pietate mansueti
quaerunt voluntatem Dei. 7. Chrysostom.
Chrysostom (died A.D. 407), who had been a Presbyter in
Antioch before he was made Patriarch of Constantinople, never
cites the Apocalypse or the four Catholic Epistles which are ex
cluded from the Syriac Canon. In a Synopsis ascribed to him the
Apocalypse is wanting, and the Catholic Epistles are expressly
mentioned as three in number.
8. Cod. Alex.
Codex Alexandrinus (Cod. A). Date perhaps end of fourth
century, probably beginning of fifth. It contains all the N. T. in
the following list: Matt., Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Oath. JEpp.
(James, Peter (2), John (3), Jude), Epp. of Paul (Rom., Cor. (2),
Gal., Eph., Phil., Coloss., Thess. (2), Hebrews, Timothy (2), Titus,
Philemon), Apocalypse of John, Clement's Epp. (2), after which
come the words bfiov ^i^Xia, as though to intimate that the Ca
non is closed, but another line adds Psalms of Solomon (18).
9. Gelasius, a.d. 492.^
The Decree as connected with the name of Gelasius runs
thus as regards the N. T: —
Item ordo Scripturarum Novi Testamenti, quem Sancta Ca-
>¦ The "Decree of Gelasius" (Decretum de libris recipiendis et non recipiendisj

24 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
tholica Romana suscipit et veneratur ecclesia. Evangeliorum li
bri IV, id est sec. Matthaeum lib. i, sec. Marcum lib. i, sec. Lu
cam lib. I, sec. Joannem lib. i. Item Actuum Apostolorum lib. i.
Epistolae Pauli Apostoli num. xiiii.
Apocalypsis lib. i. Apostolicae epistolae num. vii. Petri apo
stoli num. II. Jacobi apostoli num. i. Joannis apostoli num. iii.
Judae.

The Recension in the name of a Council under Damasus gives
the names of the Pauline Epistles, and ascribes one Epistle to
John the Apostle, two to John the Presbyter, and the Apocalypse
to John the Apostle.

The Recension in the name of Hormisdas gives the three
Johannine Epistles without distinction.
There is also a famous chapter containing the names of many
books which the Catholic Apostolic Roman Church does not at
all admit, because they are heretical or schismatical.^ Among
them are:
Acts : Itinerarium Petri Apostoh, quod appellatur Sancti de
mentis. Actus Andreae, Thomae libr. x, Petri, Phi
lippi.
Gospels : Evv. nomine Petri Apostoli, Matthiae, Jacobi Minoris,
Barnabae, Thomae (quibus Manichaei utuntur) Bar-
tholomaei, Andreae, Thaddaei, "Evv. quae falsavit
Lucianus, apocrypha; Evv. quae falsavit Isicius, apo
crypha."
Miscellaneous: De infantia Salvatoris et de Maria obstetrice ejus;
liber qui appellatur Pastoris, apocr.; libri omnes,
is valuable as containing an official statement on the part of the Eoman Church
regarding the Books to he read and to be avoided respectively. Its origin and date
are uncertain, and it comes to us with many variations in different MSS. It may
date (or perhaps some germ of it dates,) from Damasus (366-384) ; some of it is
as old as Gelasius, (492-496); but its principal forms claim the name of Hormisdas
(514-523), although probably altered in later times. It appears to rest on the
earlier testimonies of Athanasius and Jerome. The list of Biblical Books is not
found in all the MSS, but seems to have been added by (or ascribed at a later
date to) Hormisdas, and sent to Spain, where it was much needed. It shows that
views regarding the Canon required to be corrected in many places at the begin
ning of the sixth Century. In the O. T. it includes the Apocrypha.
' See Volkmar's Credner's Gesch. des N. T. Kanon, p. 290, and Credner Zur
Geschichte, p. 213. See Credner's summary iu the last-named book, p. 289.

APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS. 25
quos fecit Leucius (al. Lucius, Leutius) discipulus
diaboli; liber qui appellatur Fundamentum; liber
qui appellatur Thesaurus; liber de fihabus Adae;
Leptogenesis ; liber, qui appellatur Actus Theclae et
Pauli; liber qui appellatur Nepotis (al. Nephotes);
liber proverbiorum Sancti Xysti, ab haereticis con-
scriptus, apocrypha.
Apocalypses: Pauli, Thomae, Stephani.
10. Apostolical Constitutions (Siara^si;). ^
II. 57. Miaog 8 b avayvioOTijg icp vxprjXov rivog soTcig dvayi-
vioa'/STio Ta Blwascog. Kat .... ^£Ta tovzo al Ilqd-
^Eig al fjfisTsqai dvayivwa'/sadwaav '/at 'EniGToXat Ilav
Xov Tov aweqyoij fjficov, ag insGTeiXe Talg ix'/Xijalaig
'/ad vcp-fjyrjOiv tov dyiov nvevfiarog. Kat fiszd Tama
' The Apostolical Constitutions should perhaps scarcely be quoted, as being
an obvious forgery. Eeuss refers the greater part of them to the third century,
but they more probably belong, in whole or in part, to the foUowing century.
They claim to be sent by Clement, together with Barnabas, Timothy, and Mark.
They begin in name of the Apostles and Elders. Elsewhere they claim to bo
written by the " twelve Apostles who are not now together. " If this claim to be
a formal ordinance of the Apostles were only admitted, the question of the Canon
would be settled ! But the first barely probable allusions to the work are in the
writings of Eusebius and of Athanasius, who speak of a book called the doctrine
(or doctrines) of the Apostles. Athanasius speaks of it (Stdaxf)) as a book useful
for instructing catechumens. Eusebius puts it (StSa^ai) among the spurious. Epi
phanius speaks of a sect — the Audians — who found on the 5iaTaHi; tuv auo-
OTo'Xuv, a book counted doubtful (he says) by most people, but still not un
worthy of regard, inasmuch as it contains the whole order of Churoh Government.
Even , however, if we regarded the book which Epiphanius had in view as
being that to which Athanasius and Eusebius refer we have not found any
proof of its existence earlier than the fourth century, or the end of the third.
But, moreover, the extracts which Epiphanius gives do not agree with the contents
of the book which has come down to us. Furthermore, Epiphanius regards it as
doubtful, and does not mention it in his own list of Canonical Books. The Book,
as we have it, witnesses against itself. We observe also that it contradicts the
New Testament in prescribing feast-days and fast-days, and that it is inconsistent
with tho New Testament in making all the twelve Apostles survive till the time
when John wrote. It nevertheless contains, amid many churchly directions of late
date, not a few beautiful homiletic passages, and indicates great reverence for
Scripture. It urges reading of the Gospels as the complement (cru[j.TcXTip(0(JLa) of
the Law, the Kings, and the Prophets (i. 5) ; enjoins Exposition of the Gospel
along with the Prophets and the Law (ii. 5) ; and in an elaborate passage, giving
instructions as to public worship, it directs that " our Acts " and Paul's Epistles,
and the Gospels of Matthew and John, and of "Paul's fellow-labourers" Mark and
Luke, be read, and the Hymns of David be sung (II. 57). — Bunsen Analecta Ante-
nicaena.

26 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
8id'/ovog ^ nqea^-vTeqog dvayivwG'/sTio Ta evayyeXia, a
iyco MaTdalog '/at 'Iwdvvrjg naqe8c6'/afiEv vfilv, '/at a ol
GvvEqyot IlavXov naqeiXrjcpozsg '/aTeXsixpav vfilv, ylov/dg
'/at Mdq'/og.
At a later stage the same work says: —
VI. 16. Taika ndvTa insaTEiXafisv vfilv, iva slSsvaL exolte ttjv
fjfiezeqav (twv anoazdXcov) yvcoftrjv, oia zig iazi' '/at Ta
in' ovofiOTL fjfiwv naqd twv dae^wv '/qawdswa ^i§Xia
fiij naqa8ixEadaL' ov ydq Tolg ovofiaGi xq^ vfidg nqoai-
XEiv TWV ajTOffToylwv, dXXd tjj cpvasi twv nqayfidTiov xat
TJj yvojfijj TJj aSiaaTqocpci). 0'i8afiev ydq, otl ol neqt 2l-
fiwva '/at KXso^iov, lio8rj awTa^avTsg ^i^Xia in' hvd-
fiaGi XqiGTOv '/at twv fiadrjcwv avTOv, nsqicpsqovaiv elg
anuTrjv vfiwv tiov nscpiXrj'/OTWv XqiGTOv "/at fjfidg TOvg
avTov 8o-vXovg. Kat iv Tolg naXaiolg 8s Tivsg avvsyqa-
xpav ^i^X'ia dno'/qvcpa Mwaiwg, '/at 'Evtox, "/at '-r4.8dfi,
Haa'iov TE '/at Aa^t8 '/at "^HXia '/at tcDv Tqiwv Ilazqiaq-
%wv, cpdoqonoid "/at TTjg dXrjd-Eiag ixdqd. Toiama '/at
vvv inoirjGav ol 8vacx)vvfioL 8ia^dXXovTEg 8rjftiovqyiav, yd-
fiov, nqovoiav, TE'/voyoviav , vofiov, nqocpiqzag' ^aq^aqd
Tiva ovofiaTa iyyqdcpovTsg '/at, wg amoi cpaaiv, dyysXcov,
Td 8' dXrjdig einelv 8aifi6vwv twv avTolg vnrjxovvTwv
wv dnocpevyeTE Trjv 8L8aG'/aXiav iva firj fiETdayjjTE Ttjg
Tiftwqiag tiov amd avyyqaxpajisvcov in dndTjj '/at dnio-
Xsiq TcSv niGTcov '/at dfiSfinTiov tov Kvqiov IrjGov fia-
drjTWV.
11. Canones Ecclesiastici QUI DicuNTUR Apostolorum, c. 85. ^
"Egtw 8i Vfilv ndai xXrjqi'/olg '/at Xa'i'/olg /?t/?Xia as^dafiia
xat dyia' Trjg fiiv naXaidg 8iadrf/rjg, MioiJaswg ns-vze , Fivsaig,
' From Bunsen's Analecta Autenicsena (1854). This Canon probably dates
from the fourth century. To this date we are led by the omission of the Apo
calypse, which was not acceptable to the Eastern Christians at that time. The cu
rious claim that the Constitutions were "inscribed to you the Bishops by me
Clement, in eight books, which ought uot to be divulged before all," connects
the Canons with the Constitutions, regarding which see last Note. The title as
given above, ^' Canones Ecclesiastici qui dicuntur Apostolorum," is that given to the
Collection by Dionysius the Less, a priest who translated them from the Greek,
A.D. 600. It indicates the translator's doubts of their genuineness; and he even

CANONES ECCLESIASTICI QUI DICUNTUR APOSTOLORUM. 27
E^o8og, yleviTi'/dv, '.Aqid-fiot, '/at JEVTsqovofiiov, 'Iqaov tov Navrj,
ev TWV KqiTiov, sv Trjg 'Povd, sv BaaiXEicJv Tsaaaqw Ilaqa-
Xemoftsvwv tov fiijiXiov twv fjfteqiov, 8vo-"Ea8qa, 8vo' 'Ead-rjq, sv
'lov8etd, sv Ma'/'/a^aiwv, Tqia' 'ho§, sv WaXjiot s'/azdv nevrrj-
'/ovTa' loXoficovog §L^Xia Tqia, Haqoifuai, 'E/'/Xrjaiaaz-rjg, '^.Aofia
qofidzwv Ilqocprjcai 8e'/aE^. "E^wdev 8i vfilv nqogiazoqeiadw
fiavddvEiv vficov Tovg viovg T-rjv aocpiav tov noXvfiadovg 2iqdx ' f^fis-
TEqa 8s, TOVTSGTL Trjg '/aivrjg 8iad-^'/r^g, EvayysXia Tsaaaqa, MaT
daiov, Mdq'/ov, ylov'/d, 'iwdvvov IlavXov iniOToXat 8E'/aTsaaa-
qeg' 'IIsTqov iniOToXat 8vo' 'icodvvov, Tqslg' 'la'/co^ov, fiia' 'Iov8a,
fiia- KX-TjfievTog iniOToXat 860' xat al AiaTayat vfiwv Tolg ini-
O'/onotg 8l ifiov KX-^ftevrog iv o'/tco ^i^Xioig nqognecpiovrjfiivai,
^ [ag ov xQrj Srjfioaieveiv int ndvzcov, 8 id Ta iv amalg fivGTi'/d'']
'/ai ai Hqd^eig fjfiwv twv dnoGToXiov.
TavTa 8i neqt '/avoviov 8ieTdxdrj vfilv naq fjfiwv, w ini-
axonoi. 'Yfislg 8i ififisvovTsg amolg, awdijasadE, '/at slq-rjvrjv
e^ETE ' arreidovvTeg 8i, xoXaadi^aeade, '/at noXefiov fiez' dXXi^Xiov
a'lSiov E^ETE, 8i'/rjV Trjg avrj/otag t-tjv nqoG'rf/ovGav TivvvvTsg.
12. Codex Claromontanus.
Codex Claromontanus ^ (Cod. D of Pauline Epp.) contains
between the Epistles Philemon and Hebrews a list entitled Ver
sus Scribturarum Sanctarum, in which are all the books of the
0. T. (with Apocrypha in peculiar order). Its New Testament
list is Evangelia Mat., Joh., Marc, Luc; Epist. Pauli, ad Ro
manos, ad Chorintios 1. 2, ad Galatas, ad Efesios, ad Timotheum
L 2, ad Colosenses, ad Filimonem, ad Petrum 1. 2, Jacobi, Jo
hanni Epist. 1. 2. 3, Judae Epist., Barnabae Epist., Johannis Re-
velatio, Actus Apostolorum, Pastoris, Actus Pauh, Revelatio Petri. ^
adds, "quibus plurimi consensum non praebuere facilem." In his collection they
were 50 in number; but about 50 years later they were published in Greek,
numbering 85, by John Scliolasticus, afterwards Patriarch of Constantinople. The
Trullan Council in 692 decreed them to be genuine. See Hefele, Hist, of Councils
(Eng. trans.), p. 449. The Roman Church accepts 50, the Greek Church 85.
' The words a; . . . (jLUOTixa are supposed to have been inserted after the
Trullan Council. See Credner Gesch. des N. T. Kanon, 235.
' See Tischendorfs edition.
- This curious list wants both Epp. to Thess., Hebrews, and Philippians, while
the MS in which it finds a place contains them all. The date of the Code.\ is
probably of the sixth century. The date and origin of the list can ouly be con-

28 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.

13. Anastasius Sinaita.^
neqt Tiov §' §i§Xiwv, '/at oaa to-vtwv i'/Tog.
a'. Fivsaig , 
Xs. EvayysXiov '/aTa MaTdaiov , Xg. xaTd Mdq'/ov , Xt, . '/ard
ylov'/av, Xrj. xaTd 'Iwdvvrjv, Xd'. Ilqd^Eig tcHv anoaToXwv, fi .
'laxio^ov 'EniaToX-rj, fia. IIsTqov, fi^'. IIsTqov, fiy. 'Iwdvvov,
fi8'. 'Iwdvvov, fis'. 'Icodvvov, fig'. 'Iov8a, fit,'. IlavXov nqdg "^Pw-
fiaiovg, firj'. nqdg Koqivdiovg, fi&'. nqdg Koqivdiovg /?', v'.
nqdg FaXdrag, va'. nqdg 'Ecpsaiovg, v§'. nqdg OiXmnrjaiovg,
vy. nqdg KoXoaaaslg, v8'. nqdg QeaaaXovi'/elg, ve'. nqdg Qsa-
aaXovi'/slg //, vg'. nqdg Tifiodsov, vll,'. nqdg Tifiodsov /S', vrj'.
nqdg TLtov, vd'. nqdg (DiXifjfiova, ^'. nqdg 'E^qaiovg.
Kat baa e^w TtSv ^'.
a', aocpia 2oXoficjJvTog 
L. 'HXia dno'/dXvtpig , la. 'Haaiov oqaaig.
Kat oaa dno'/qvcpa.
a'. '.A8dfi, §'. 'Evio'x, y. .Aafiki, 8' . IlaTqidqxai, e'. '/w-
a-Tjq) FLqoasvxrj, g. 'EX8dfi '/at Mo8dfi, ^'. Jiadrf/rj MwGscog,
rj. (wanting), d-'. WaXjidv 2oXofiwvTog , l. "HXiov dn. /. t. X.
t|8 . 2ocpoviov ano/dXvipig, ty . Zaxaqiov dnoxdXvrpig, i8'. "Ea-
8qa anoxdXvipig, is'. 'laxd^ov laToqia, tg'. Ilirqav ano'/dXvxpig,
it'. IlEqio8oL '/at Ai8axat twv dnoaToXav, irj. Baqvd^a ini-
OToXij, id-'. Ua-vXov nqd^sig, '/'. Ila-vXov dno'/dXvipig, xa'. Ai-
8aa'/aXia KX^^fisvTog, x/S'. 'lyvaTiov 8i8aaxaXia, '/y. IloXv/dq-
jectured. It would probably be useless to seek to account for omissions in it which
are more likely to have arisen from accident or ignorance than from intention or
knowledge. Tisch, (Proleg. p. XVI) says that the list was evidently made before
there was much discussion of the Canon ; that its way of dealing with Hebrews
shows that it was made before Augustine's day ; and that it was raost probably
of African origin. But the arguments scarcely apply, for Hebrews is not the only
omitted Epistle ; and moreover the presence of non-canonical books in Cod. A
and in >! cannot be reconciled with (say) the Decree of the Council of Laodicea.
The presence or absence of books in a special list or MS is not always to be
explained by general considerations.
' Anastasius Sinaita, Patriarch of Antioch, died 599. The Books are di
vided into three classes: (1) Biblical (60 in number, i.e., 34 of 0. T. without
Apocr., 26 of N. T. without Apocalypse), (2) Extra Biblical, (3) Apocryphal.
In the second class are The Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Maccabees (4), Esther,
Judith, Tobit. See Credner Gesch. des N. T. Kanons, p. 240; Westcott Canon,
p. 520.

TRULLAN COUNCIL. NICEPHORUS. 29
nov 8i8aa:/aXia, '/8'. EvayysXiov '/UTd Baqvd^av, /e. EvayysXiov
xaTa MaTdiav. ^

14. Trullan Council a.d. 692.^
E8o^E '/at Tomo tJj dyia tuvtjj avvoSij) '/dXXiOTd te '/at anov-
8ai6TaTtt' WOTS fiivsiv '/at dno tov vvv ^e^aiovg xat dacpaXelg
nqdg ipvycov dsqansiav '/at laTqsiav nadcov TOvg vnd twv nqd
Tjfiiov dyicov xat fia'/aqimv naTsqcov SExdivzag '/at "/vqwdsvTag,
aXXd fVTjv '/at naqa8odsvTag fjfiiv ovofiavi twv ayiwv '/at iv86^cov
AtnoaToXwv oy8orj'/6vTa nsvTS '/avovag. 'Enei8rj 8i iv Tomoig
Tolg '/avoaiv ivrsTaXTai 8ixEGdai fjfiag Tag twv amwv dyiwv
AnoGToXiov 8id KXifjfisvzog Aiazd^eig, aig tigl ndXai vnd twv
STEqo8o^wv int Xvfijj Trjg i'/'/Xrjaiag voda Tivd '/at ^sva Trjg sv-
as^Eiag naqEvsTsdrjaav, to evnqsnig xdXXog twv d-siwv 8oyfidTwv
fjfiiv afiavqcoaavTa, t^v twv toio^vtwv AiaTa^swv nqoGcpoqwg dno-
§oX^fjv nsnoirjfisda nqdg T-rjv Tov x^tcfTtavtzwra'TOj; noifiviov ol-
'/o8ofirjv "/at aacpdXsiav ov8afiwg iy/qivovTsg Ta Trjg alqsTi'/rjg
ipEv8oXoyiag '/vrjfiaTa, xat tjj yvrjaiq tiov dnoGToXwv '/at bXo-
"/X-fjqij) 8L8ax'jj naqeveiqovTEg. 'EniacpqayH^Oftev 8i '/at Tovg Xol-
novg ndvTag Isqo-ug '/avovag TOvg vnd twv dyiwv '/at fia'/aqiwv
naTsqwv fjfitov i'/Tsdivrag .... [Here come the names of the
Councils approved of, among which are those of Nicaea, of Lao
dicea, and of Carthage. But this Trullan decree is not consistent
with itself; e.g., the opinions of Athanasius are approved; but
Athanasius includes the Apocalypse in the N. T., while the Apo
stolical Canons (also approved) excluded the Apocalypse. The
Apostohcal Canons also included the Clementine Letters and Con
stitutions, which again excluded the Catholic Epistles.]
15. INlCEPHORUS, A.D. 828. ^
'Oaai elat delai yqacpat i'/'/Xrjaia^ojievai '/at '/E'/avoviajisvai.
Kat fj TOVTWV GTixofiETqia omwg 

° The Apocalypse of John is not in the list anywhere.
• The seventh General Council, held at Constantinople. See Notes on Laod.
and Carth. Councils.
» Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople, (died A.D. 828), appended a sticho-
metry to his brief Chronography. His O. T. list has Baruch and wants Esther.

30 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
Trjg vsag 8iad'fj/rjg.
EvayysXiov '/.xxTa Mardalov avixoi ^^tp' [2500].
Evayy. '/azd Mdq'/ov az. p [2000].
Evayy. v.aTd ylovxdv ot. Px' [2600].
Evayy. '/aTd 'Iwdvvrjv gt. ^t [2300 al. 2003].
Ilqd^eig twv dnoOToXcov aT. pcJ [2800].
IlavXov iniaToXat i8', aT. ^st' [5300].
KadoXi'/at V, 'la'/co^ov a', nizqov /?', 'Iwdvvov y , 'lov8a a.
'Ofiov Trjg vsag 8Ladrj'/rjg ^i§Xia '/g .
Kat oaai Trjg vsag avTiXsyovzai.
'Ano'/dXvipig 'Icodvvov ar'ixoi av [1400].
'.A.no'/dXvrpig IIsTqov ot. t [300].
Baqvd^a iniOToX-rj az. cit^' [1360].
EvayysXiov xara ''E^qaiovg az. Pg [2200].
Kat oaa Trjg vsag dno'/qvcpa.
Il£qio8og IIsTqov aTiyoi '§xp'v' [2750].
nsqiodog 'icodvvov aT. P'x [2600].
IlEq'io8og Qiofidv [sic] az. cxt [1300].
Evayy. '/aTa Qiojidv gt. jut [1300].
Ai8a'/rj dnooToXiov ot. a' [200].
KX-rjfiEVTog a. /?'. ot. p% [2600].
'lyvaTiov, IloXv/aqnov, Iloiftivog '/at '^Eqfid [sic].
16. Canon of Council of Trent, a.d. 1546.^
Sacrosancta oecumenica et generalis Tridentina Synodus, in
Spiritu Sancto legitime congregata praesidentibus in ea eisdem
tribus Apostolicae Sedis legatis hoc sibi perpetuo ante omnia
proponens, ut sublatis erroribus puritas ipsa evangelii in ecclesia
conservetur, quod promissum ante per -Prophetas in Scripturis
His list of N. T. Books agrees with our Canon — save that the Apocalypse is not
found in that division, but in the second class, or Antilegomeua. His list may
be an older one revived. His division reminds us of Eusebius's, but instead of
ofioXoyoufiEvat fpa.ifa.\, he speaks of acceptance by the Churoh, and canonisation.
See Credner Gesch. des N. T. Kanon, p. 243; Westcott Canon, p. 522.
' Chemnitz, Geneva (1614), Denzinger, Enchiridion (1865); Schaff, Creeds
(1877).

CANON OP COUNCIL OP TRENT. 31
Sanctis, Dominus noster Jesus Christus Dei filius, proprio ore
primum promulgavit, deinde per suos Apostolos, tanquam fon
tem omnis et salutaris veritatis et morum disciplinae omni crea
turae praedicari jussit, perspiciensque hanc veritatem et disci-
plinam contineri in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus,
quae ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae, aut ab ipsis Apo-
stohs Spiritu Sancto dictante, quasi per manus traditae ad nos
usque pervenerunt; orthodoxorum patrum exempla secuta, omnes
libros tam Veteris quam Novi Testamenti (cum utriusque unus
Deus sit auctor), necnon traditiones illas tum ad fidem, tum ad
mores pertinentes, tanquam vel ore tenus a Christo vel a Spiritu
Sancto dictatas, et continua successione in Ecclesia Catholica con-
conservatas, pari pietatis affectu ac reverentia suscipit ac vene
ratur. Sacrorum vero librorum indicem, huic decreto adscriben-
dum consult ; ne cui dubitatio suboriri possit, quinam sint qui ab
ipsa Synodo suscipiuntur. Sunt vero infra scripti Testamenti Ve
teris. Quinque Moysis scilicet Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri,
Deuteronomium. Deinde Josue, Judicum, Ruth, quatuor Regum,
Paralipomenon duo, Esdrae duo, primus scilicet et secundus, qui
dicitur Nehemias, Thobias, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalterium Davi
dicum CL Psalmorum. Parabolae, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Cantico-
rum, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Hieremias, Baruch, Ezechiel,
Daniel, duodecim prophetae minores, scilicet Osee, Joel, Amos,
Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Za-
charias, Malachias, duo Machabaeorum, primus scilicet et secun
dus. Testamenti Novi, quatuor Evangelia, secundum Matthaeum,
Marcum, Lucam, et Joannem, Acta Apostolorum a Luca evange
lista conscripta. Quatuordecim epistolae beati Pauli apostoli, sci
licet ad Romanos, ad Corinthios duae, ad Galatas, ad Ephesios,
ad Philippenses, ad Colossenses, ad Thessalonicenses duae, ad
Timotheum duae, ad Titum, ad Philemonem, ad Hebraeos, Petri
apostoli duae, Joannis apostoli tres, Jacobi una, Judae apostoli
una, et Apocalypsis Joannis apostoli. Si quis autem libros ipsos
integros, cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in ecclesia cathohca
legi consueverunt, et in veteri vulgata Latina editione habentur,
pro sacris et canonicis non susceperit: et traditiones praedictas
sciens et prudens contempserit: anathema sit.

32 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
The Council of Trent also (Sessio 4, April 8, 1546) fixed the
text of scripture as in the Vulgate Edition:
2 Insuper eadem S. S. Synodus considerans non parum utili-
tatis accedere posse Ecclesiae Dei si ex omnibus latinis editio
nibus quae circumferuntur sacrorum librorum quaenam pro au
th en tica habenda sit, innotescat, statuit et declarat ut haec ipsa
vetus et vulgata editio, quae longo tot saeculorum usu in ipsa
ecclesia probata est, in pubhcis lectionibus, disputationibus, prae-
dicationibus et expositionibus pro authentica habeatur, et ut nemo
illam rejicere quovis praetextu audeat vel praesumat . . . . de-
crevit et statuit ut posthac Scriptura Sacra, potissimum vero
haec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio, quam emendatissime impri
matur.*

17. Old Catholic Union ^ Theses. 1874.
Art. I. We agree that the apocryphal or deuterocanonical books
of thc Old Testament are not of the same canonicity as
the books contained in the Hebrew canon.
Art. III. We agree that the reading of Holy Scripture in the
vulgar tongue cannot be lawfully forbidden.
Art. IX. The Holy Scriptures being recognized as the primary rule
of Faith, we agree that the genuine tradition i.e., thc
unbroken transmission, — partly oral, partly in writing, —
2 See Denzinger Enchiridion, p. 226. Eeuss, Geschichte, § 482. Schaff, Creeds
of Christendom, p. 82.
* There is controversy as to the precise scope of this decree. It is pleaded
on the one hand that it only singles out the Vulgate from other Latin editions:
and decrees that a correct edition of it shall be published forthwith. It is repre
sented on the other hand that the attempts of successive Popes [Sixtus V. 1590,
Clement VIII. 1592] to publish a standard edition show the object of the decree
to have been the fixing of the text of Scripture as against all comers. The decree
is certainly not so clear as Protestants sometimes represent it to be. But there
can be little freedom when any Latin text of the Vulgate is held as "authentic"
in all public controversies. Compare the prohibition of reading Scripture in tho
Vulgar tongue except when special permission has been obtained (Pius IV. 1564).
The Clementine Vulgate, which was so soon needed to supersede the edition of
the Pope two years before, is still the standard in the Romish Church.
' A conference of "Old Catholics," "Orthodox Russians and Greeks," "Eng
lish Episcopalians" and "American Episcopalians" held at Bonn in 1874 under the
presidency of Dr Dollinger, agreed upon certain Articles as embodying their com
mon belief (See Schaff, Greek and Latin Creeds, p. 545.) The English is au
thoritative. 'The Theses are given here, as bearing on the previous Extract, though
they are of later date than the Extracts which follow.

CYRIL lukar's confession. 33
of the doctrine delivered by Christ and the Apostles, is
an authoritative 2 source of teaching for all successive
generations of Christians. This tradition is partly to be
found in the consensus of the great ecclesiastical bodies
standing in historical continuity with the primitive Church,
partly to be gathered by scientific method from the
written documents of all centuries.
18. Cyril Lukar's Confession.^
"^Isqdv yqacpcjv nola §i^Xia '/aXslg;^
'Isqdv yqacprjv ndvra zd '/avovr/d ^i[iXia Xsyofiev, dneq wg
'/avova T5;g n'lGTScog fjfiwv '/at Trjg awTrjqiag naqsXd^Ofiev '/at
'/qarovfiEV, fidXiad' otl deonvevOTov fjfiiv nqo^dXXovai Trjv 8t-
8aa'/aXiav, '/cu amdq'/rj '/arrjxrjaai, cpwTiaai '/at zsXEuoaai tc)V Tin
niazEL jcqoasqxdfievov. Tama 8i Td "/avovixd (ii(IXia Toaama
Tdv dqidfidv eivai niaTEuofiev, baa ij iv ytao8i'/eicx avvo8og dne-
cprjvazo, '/at fj zov XqiGTov '/adoXr/f xat oqd-68o'§og i'/'/Xrjoia -ind
TOV navayiov nvEVfiarog cpwziadelaa fts'/qi tov naqovTog vnayo-
qevEi. ".Ansq 8i dno'/qvcpa Xsyoftev, 8id tovto to inoivvfiov o-'u-
Tcog syovaiv, otl Td xvqog naqd tov navayiov nve-vfiazog oi'/
eyovaiv cog zd xvqicog '/at dvajicpi^oXcog '/avovixd (IipXia, iv oig
fj TOV MwiJaewg nEvzdzEv'Xog, "/at zd dyioyqacpa "/at ol nqocprjzai,
' German: Eine autoritative (gottgewoUte) Erkenntnissquelle.
• For the views of the Greek Church on Canonicity see Introduction. The
following note may give an outline. Cyril Lukar, a native of Crete, was succes
sively Patriarch of Alexandria and of Constantinople. He published his " Orien-
talium Professio" at Geneva (Latin in 1629, Greek in 1633). This "Professio"
was too Protestant in its tone for the Eastern Church, in name of which it was
issued; and accordingly it was denounced as Calvinistic hythe "Council of Jeru
salem," which met in 1672. Of that Council Dositheos was President, aud his
Confession and Catechism were adopted. Cyril had proclaimed the supremacy of
Scripture and the right of every man to read the Word of God ; Dcsitheos made
Scripture and the Church equal, and canonized those books of the 0. T. which
Cyril "stupidly termed Apocrypha." His manifestoes were regarded as the voice
of the Eastern Church on the subject of the Canon until 1839, when Philaret,
Metropolitan of Moscow, published a Catechism which is now generally used in
Eussian schools and churches. This Catechism, while it exalts tradition as a guide
to the understanding of the Scripture and to the observance of a, proper ritual,
nevertheless makes Scripture indispensable for securing the unchangeableness of
revelation. The Catalogue of 0. 'T. Books is explicitly made to correspond with
the Hebrew Canon ; and the N. T. agrees with our Canon, Hebrews being ascribed
to Paul. 2 From Kimmel, Lib. Symb. Ecc. Or. p. 42. 3

34 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
cxTiva wqiaev dvayivcoaxeadai fj sv ytao8i'/Eiq avvo8og, and Trjg
naXaidg 8iad'rf/rjg §i(lXta si'/oai 8-vo' and 8i Trjg vsag nXovTOVfisv
TOvg TSGGaqag svayyeXiGTag, Tag nqd^eig. Tag sniaToXdg fiaxa-
qiov IlavXov, xat Tag xadoXr/dg aig awdnTOfisv xat TfjV ano'/a-
Xvipiv TOV rjyanrjfisvov. Kat Tama fiiv elvai Td xavovixd ^i^X'ia
'/qaTOVfiev xat TavTU Isqdv yqacprjv Xsyeadai bjioXoyovfiev.
19. Council of Jerusalem, March 1672. ^
Dosilhei Confessio.
'EqcoTrjaig y . '^leqdv yqacprjv nola (ii(iXia '/aXelg;
^TOixovvTeg td) '/mvovi Trjg '/adoXi'/rjg i'/'/Xrjoiag, leqdv yqacprjv
'/aXovfiev ixelva nana, dneq b K-vqiXXog vnd Trjg iv yiao8LXEiq
avv68ov iqaviadfiEVOg dqidfisl. Kat nqdg TOVToig aneq dawsxwg
'/at dfiadwg, eit' ovv idsXoxa'/ovqywg, dno'/qvcpa '/aTWvofiaae'
T'Tjv 2ocpiav 8rjXa8fj tov ^oXofiwvTog, Trjv 'lov8rjd, Tdv Tw/J/av,
T'fjv laToqiav tov 8qd'/ovzog, T'Tjv 'loToqiav Trjg 2wadvvrjg, Toiig
Ma'/'/a^aiovg , xat T'Tjv Aocpiav tov Ssiqdx. 'Hfisig ydq fiETd twv
ft^^wv T^g dsiag yqacpdg yvrjoiiov jSi^Xicov '/at Tama yvrjaia Trjg
yqacprjg fiiqrj '/qivofisv, otl fj naqa86Gaaa dqxaia awrjOeia '/at
fidXiOTa fj "/ad-oXi'/Tj i'/xXr^aia yvfjaia sivai Ta Isqd svayyiXia '/at
T aXXa TTjg yqacprjg §L^Xia, '/at Tama elvai Trjg dyiag yqacprjg
fisqrj avaficpi^oXwg naqE8w"/e' '/qt tovtwv fj dqvrjaig i'/eivcov iaztv
ddsTTjaig. El 8s nov 8o'/eL jirj aet ndvva vnd ndvzwv auy/ava-
qidftsladai , ov8iv fjVTOv ojiwg '/at Tama naqd Te avv68wv '/at
noXX(7)v bawv Trjg '/adoXi'/iijg i'/'/Xrjaiag naXaiozaTwv Te '/at iy/qi-
Twv deoXoywv dqidfielTai '/at avy/azaqidfielTai tjj ndajj yqacpfj,
a ndvra '/at fjfielg '/avovi'/d §L§Xia xqivofiev, xat Tama tyjv leqdv
yqacprjv eivai bfioXoyovfiev.
20. Philaret's Longer Catechism ^ of the Orthodox,
Catholic, Eastern Church, Moscow, 1839.
(Question) 16. How is divine revelation spread among men and
preserved in the true Church?
By two channels— holy tradition and holy Scripture.
' Kimmel, p. 467. The same Council sanctioned Mogilas' Confession (1633).
' See Schaff, Creeds of the Greek and Latin Churches, p. 445.

philaret's longee catechism. 35
17. What is meant by the name Jiolfj tradition?
By the name holy tradition is meant the doctrine of the
faith, the law of God, the sacraments, and the ritual as
handed down by the true believers and worshippers of
God by word and example from one to another, and from
generation to generation.
18. Is there any sure repository of holy tradition?
All true believers united by the doctrine of thc faith,
collectively and successively, by the will of God, compose
the Church; and she is the sure repository of holy tra
dition, or as St. Paul expresses it, "The Church of the
living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" — 1 Tim.
iii. 15. St. Irenaeus writes thus : " We ought not to seek among
others the truth, which we may have for asking from
the Church: for in her, as in a rich treasure house, the
Apostles have laid up in its fulness all that pertains to
the truth, so that whosover seeketh may receive from
her the food of life. She is the door of life." (Adv.
Haeres. lib. III. c 4.)
19. What is that which you call hol'jj Scripture?-
Certain books written by the Spirit of God through men
sanctified by God, called Prophets and Apostles. These
books are commonly termed the Bible.
20. What does the word BiUe mean?
It is Greek, and means the iooks. The name signifies
that the sacred books deserve attention before all others.
21. Which is the more ancient, holy tradition or holy Scripture?
The most ancient and original instrument for spreading
divine revelation is holy tradition  The necessity
of tradition is further evident from this, that books can
be available only to a small part of mankind, but tra
dition to all.
22.— Why, then, was holy Scripture given?
To this end, that divine revelation might be preserved
more exactly and unchangeably. In holy Scripture we
read the words of the Prophets and Apostles precisely
as if we were living with them and listening to them,

36 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
although the latest of the sacred books were written a
thousand and some hundred years before our time.
23. Must we follow holy tradition, even when we possess holy
Scripture ?
We must follow that tradition which agrees with the di
vine revelation and with holy Scripture, as is taught
us by holy Scripture itself. The Apostle Paul writes:
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions
which ye have been taught, whether by word or our
epistle" — 2 Thess. ii. 15.
31. How many are the books of the Old Testament?
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Athanasius the Great, and St.
John Damascene reckon them at twenty-two, agreeing
therein with the Jews, who so reckon them in the ori
ginal Hebrew tongue. (Athanas. Ep. XXXIX de Test.,
J. Damasc. Theol. lib. IV. c 17.)
34. Why is there no notice taken in this enumeration [the enu
meration of St. Cyril and St. Athanasius] of the books of
the Old Testament, of the book of the Wisdom of the Son
of Sirach, and of certain others?
Because they do not exist in the Hebrew.
35. How are we to regard these last named books?
Athanasius the Great says that they have been appointed
of the Fathers to be read by proselytes who are pre
paring for admission into the Church.
44. How many are the books of the New Tetament?
Twenty-seven. LUTHEEAN TESTIMONY.
21. Formula Concordiae. 1577.^
Art. I.
1. Credimus, confitemur et docemus, unicam regulam et nor-
mam, secundum quam omnia dogmata omnesque doctores
aestimari et judicari oporteat, nullam omnino aliam esse,
' First published at Dresden, and translated into Latin by Osiander, 1580;
the authorized text 1584. See Hase, Libri symbolici, p. 570, and Prolog., p. CXXI.
Schaff's Creeds of the Evangelical Protestant Churches, p. 93.

FORMULA CONCORDIAE. CONF. BASIL. 37
quam Prophetica et Apostolica scripta cum Veteris, tum
Novi Testamenti, sicut scriptum est: Ps. cxix. 105. Et Di-
vus Paulus inquit Gal. i. 8: Etiamsi &c.
2. Reliqua vero sive patrum sive neotericorum scripta, quocun
que veniant nomine, sacris Uteris nequaquam sunt acquipa-
randa, sed universa illis ita subjicienda sunt, ut alia ratione
non recipiantur, nisi testium loco, qui doceant, quod etiam
post Apostolorum tempora, et in quibus partibus orbis, doc
trina ilia Prophetarum et Apostolorum sincerior conservata
sit.
7. Hoc modo luculentum discrimen inter sacras Veteris et Novi
Testamenti literas, et omnia aliorum scripta retinetur: et
sola Sacra Scriptura judex, norma et regula agnoscitur, ad
quam, ceu ad Lydium lapidem, omnia dogmata exigenda sunt
et judicanda, an pia, an impia, an vera, an vero falsa sint.
8. Caetera autem Symbola, et alia scripta, quorum paulo ante
mentionem fecimus, non obtinent auctoritatem judicis: haec
enim dignitas sohs sacris Uteris debetur: sed duntaxat pro
religione nostra testimonium dicunt eamque explicant, ac
ostendunt, quomodo singulis temporibus sacrae literae in ar-
ticulis controversis in ecclesia Dei a doctoribus, qui tum vix
erunt, intellectae et explicatae fuerint, et quibus rationibus
dogmata cum Sacra Scriptura pugnantia rejecta et condem-
nata sint. REFORMED CONFESSIONS.
22. Conf. Basil. ^ (Posterior) or Conf. Helvet. (Prior).
1536.
German. Die heil^e gotliche biblische gschrifft die da ist das
wort gottes, von dem helgen geist inggeben, und durch
die propheten und apostell der welt furgetragen, ist die
aller alteste volkomnste und hochste leer, begrifft allein
alles das, das zu warer erkanntniiss liebe und eer gottes,
zu rechter warer fromkeit, und anrichtung eines fromen
eerbaren und gottsaligen lebens dienet.^
' The Conf Bas. Prior 1530 or 1531 has no chapter on Scripture.
2 Niemeyer, CoUectio Confessionum, p. 105. This Confession was made by

38 TESTIMONIES TO THE CANON.
Latin. Scriptura Canonica verbum dei, Spiritu S. tradita, et per
prophetas apostolosque mundo proposita, omnium per-
fectissima antiquissima Philosophia, pietatem omnem,
omnem vitae rationem sola perfecte continet. ^
23. Confessio Helvetica Posterior. ^ 1566.
Art. 1. Credimus et confitemur, Scripturas Canonicas sanctorum
Prophetarum et Apostolorum utriusque Testamenti ipsum
verum esse verbum Dei, et auctoritatem sufficientem ex
semetipsis, non ex hominibus habere. Nam Deus ipse
loquutus est Patribus, Prophetis, et Apostolis, et loqui
tur adhuc nobis per Scripturas Sanctas.
24. Confessio Fidei Gallicana.^ 1559.
(Confession of La Eochelle, 1571.)
French. Art. IV. Nous connaissons ces livres etre canoniques, et
la regie tres certaine de notre foi non tant par le com-
mun accord et consentement de I'Eglise, que par le te-
moignage et persuasion int6rieure du Saint-Esprit, qui
nous les fait discerner d'avec les autres livres eccMsias-
tiques, sur lesquels, encore qu'ils soient utiles, on ne
peut fonder aucun article de foi.
Art. V. Nous croyons que la Parole qui est contenue en ces
livres, est procedee de Dieu, duquel seul elle prend son
autorit^, et non des hommes. Et d'autant qu'elle est
la regie de toute v6rit6, contenant tout ce qui est ne
cessaire pour le service de Dieu et de notre salut, il
n'est pas loisible aux hommes, ni meme aux Anges, d'y
ajouter, diminuer, ou changer. D'ou il s'ensuit que ni
Bullinger, Leo Judae, and others. It was the first which represented the faith
of all the Reformed Swiss Cantons. The German and Latin versions do not ver
bally agree, though both are authoritative.
' Niemeyer, p. 115.
' Schaff, Creeds of .the Evangelical Protestant Churches, p. 236.
' Prepared by Calvin and De Chandieu; revised and approved by a Synod
at Paris 1559; delivered by Beza to Charles IX at Poissy, 1561 ; adopted by tho
Synod of La Eochelle, 1571, and sanctioned by Henry IV. It is known as the
Confession of Rochelle. See Schaff, p. 356.

OLD SCOTTISH CONFESSION. CONFESSIO BOHOEMICA. 39
I'antiquite, ni les coutumes, ni la multitude, ni la sa-
gesse humaine, ni les jugements, ni les arrets, ni les
edits, ni les d^crets, ni les conciles, ni les visions, ni
les miracles, ne doivent etre opposes a cette Ecriture
sainte, mais, au contraire, toutes choses doivent etre
examinees r^gl^es et r6form6es selon elle.

25. Old Scottish Confession. ^ 1560.
[After a statement of the marks of the true "kirks of God".]
Art. 18. And sik kirks, we the inhabitantis of the Realme of
Scotland, professoris of Christ Jesus, professis our selfis
to have in our citties, towns and places reformed, for
the doctrine taucht in our kirkis, conteined in the
written Worde of God, to wit, in the bulks of the Auld
and New Testamentis, in those buikis we meane quhilk
of the ancient have been reputed canonicall.
Art. 19. ''As we beleeve and confesse the Scriptures of God suf
ficient to instruct and make the man of God perfite,
so do we affirme and avow the authoritie of the same
to be of God, and nether to depend on men nor an-
gelis. We affirme therefore that sik as allege the Scrip
ture to have na uther authoritie but that quhilk it hes
received from the kirk to be blasphemous against God,
and injurious to the trew kirk, quhilk alwaies heares
and obeyis the voice of her awin Spouse and pastor
(2 Tim. iii. 16, 17) but takis not upon her to be maistres
over the samin."^

26. Confessio Bohoemica^. 1535.
Art. I. Principio nostri omnes unanimi consensu docent scriptu
ras sacras quae in Bibliis ipsis continentur, et a patri
bus receptae auctoritateque Canonica donatae sunt, pro
inconcusse veris certissimisque habendas.
' Published in 1560; afterwards translated into Latin.
s Dunlop's Confessions, II. 13.
J Niemeyer, Coll. Conf. p. 787.

40 testimonies to the canon.
27. Anglican Articles of Religion. 1562.
Art. VI. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand
those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament,
of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. ^
[Here follow the Books of the 0. T.]
And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church
doth read for example of life and instruction of manners:
but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doc
trine: such are these following. [Here follow the Books
of the 0. T. Apocrypha.]
All the Books of the New Testament, as they are
commonly received, we do receive, and account them Ca
nonical.^
28. Westminster Confession of Faith. 1643-1647.
II. Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God
written, are now contained all the Books of the Old and New
Testaments, which are these —
(Here follow the names of the Books)
all which are given by in'spiration of God, to be the rule
of faith and life.
III. The Books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine
inspiration, are no part of the Scripture; and therefore are
of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any other
wise approved, or made use of, than any other human
writings.
IV. The authority of the holy Scripture for which it ought to
be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony
of any man or Church, but wholly upon God (who is truth
itself), the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received,
because it is the word of God.
V. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the
• So also the Conf Wirtembergica : Sacram Scripturam vocamus eos cano-
nicos libros V. et N. T. de quorum autoritate in ecclesia nunquam dubitatum est.
But the Antilegomeua are excluded from its list. (Reuss, Gesch. § 335.)
-' There is no list of the Canonical Books of the N. T.

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 41
Church to an high and reverend esteem of the holy Scripture,
and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doc
trine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts,
the scope of the whole, (which is to give all glory to God,)
the full discovery it makes of the only way of man's salva
tion, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire
perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly
evidence itself to be the word of God: yet notwithstanding
our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth
and divine authority thereof is from the inward work of the
Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in our
hearts.

42 THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
III.
THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
1. Ignatius.
Philad. 5. '.AXX' fj nqoaevxrj vfiwv elg Qedv jis dnaqTiasi,
iva iv (ll xX'Tjqcj) 'TjXs'Tjdrjv iniT'vy^co , ^rqoacpvyiiiv Tcp evayy eX ioj wg
aaq'/i Irpov , '/at Tolg an oOToXo ig cog nqea^vTeqlcj) i'/'/Xrjoiag.
Kat Toi-g nqocpvjtag 8i dyanwfiev 8id Td '/at avTOvg elg to svay-
y iXi ov '/aTrfyysX'/svai '/at sig amdv iXniCeiv '/at avrdv dvafiiveiv
iv ill '/at niare'vaavTEg iacodrjoav, iv svottjti 'Itjgov Xqiazov ovzeg,
dSiaydnrjzoi "/at d^iodavfiaOToi dyioi, vnd 'Itjoov Xqiarov fi_efiaq-
Tvqrjfiivoi "/at avvrjqidfir^fisvoi sv tcJi s-uayyeXicj Trjg "/oivrjg iX-
ni8og. 1
Philad. 8. '-^IlaqaxaXca 8i vfidg, ftrj8iv '/aT iqidslav nqda-
aeiv, dXXd '/ard xpto'To/(ai9'/av inst 'rjxovad tivcov XsyovTwv,
' "Prophets" here must mean the Prophetic authors of Books in the 0. T.
"Gospel" probably means the contents of the Gospel ; and the "Apostles" we take
to mean the apostolic founders of the Christian Church. These last renderings
are indefinite; but there are objections to any more definite interpretation of the
phrases used. At a later time "the Gospel" and "the Apostle" were familiar
terms, indicating the two great subdivisions of the New Testament; but we want
authority for ascribing that meaning to so early a writer as Ignatius. He pro
bably meant by "Gospel" to denote the Christian truth contained in Christ's life,
whether conveyed in writing or orally; and by "Apostles" to indicate a reference
to their writings, and at the sarae time to their traditional arrangements in and
for the Church. Elsewhere he likens the Presbytery to the synod or Sanhedrim
of Apostles (Magnesians c. 6 ; Trallians c. 2 and c. 3) : and he seems here to speak
of the Apostles as a perpetual Presbytery whose opinion on all difficulties was
easily obtained and was to be implicitly followed. The following Extracts from
the Smyrnaean Epistle seem to be consistent with this rendering; and to make the
other from the Philadelphian more easily intelligible. Liirdner (citing on the same
side Grabe, Mill and Le Clere) "understands by the 'Gospel' the book or volume
of the Gospels ; by ' the Apostles ' the book or volume of their Epistles ; as by
' the Prophets ' the volume or whole canon of the New Testament." See Lardner
vol. I. p. 322.
2 The readings in this difficult passage vary ; dpx»Za, aSifjXTa, ou TCpoxEttai,
being found. By using apy^cEa (archives) a consistent meaning is given. It ap
pears that Ignatius, in disputing with certain adversaries — heretics — found that
they insisted on appealing to the Archives — to the original Gospel records ; and
that when he said " It is written," they retorted that this did not close the con
troversy (itpo'xEiTai, i.e., that is the point in dispiite). Whereupon he recapitulates
the main facts on record which those heretics appear to have denied. It is clear,
therefore, that at this period disputants on both sides appealed to viritten standards.
It may be doubtful whether both appealed to the same standards; but it seems
most probable that they did, and that they differed as to the interpretations. The

IGNATIUS. MELITO. 43
OTI "idv ftij iv Tolg dq'xsioig svqw, iv ti7) svayysXicj, ov ni-
OTEvco'" Kat XsyovTog fiov amolg, ozi "ysyqanTai''" dns'/qid-qadv
fioi, OTl "nqo'/siTai." Efiot 8i dq'/sld iaziv 'irjGovg XqiGTog' Td
adi'/Ta aqxsla b OTavqdg amov xat b ddvaTog '/at fj dvaOTaaig
avTOv, '/at fj niaug fj 8l' amov ' iv oig dsXco iv tjj nqoasvxjj Vftwv
8ixaiwdrjvai. Old Latin version. Deprecor autem vos, nihil secundum con-
tentionem facere, sed secundum Christi disciplinam; quia audivi
quosdam dicentes quoniam si non in veteribus invenio, in Evan
gelio non credo. Et dicente me ipsis, quoniam scriptum est, re-
sponderunt mihi, quoniam praejacet. Mihi autem principium est
Jesus Christus; inapproximabilia principia crux ipsius et mors,
et resurrectio ipsius, et fides quae per ipsum; in quibus volo
in oratione vestra justificari.
Philad. 9. 'E^aiqsTov 8 a n e'/^el Td evayysXiov, ttjv
naqovaiav tov aiOTrjqog, Kvqiov fjfiwv 'ItjOov XqiGTOv, to nddog
avzov, '/at ttjv avdoTaaiv. Ol ydq dyanrjcot nqocprjzai '/arrfyyEiXav
sig auTov Td 8e EvayysXiov dnaqriGftd ioTiv dcpdaqaiag.
Smyrn. 5. Ovg ov/ snsiaav al nqocprjTslai , ov8i b vofiog
Dlcoaiwg, dXX' ov8i fisyqi vvv to svayysXiov, ov8i Ta fjfiSTsqa
TCOV '/aT dv8qa nadifjfiaTa.
Smyrn. 7. Ilqinov ovv iaztv . . . nqoGsxsiv Tolg nqocpiqzaig,
i^caqsTcog 8i Tii) EuayysXio), iv w Td nddog fjfiiv 8s8fjXcoTai,
'/at fj avdoTaaig TezEXsicozai.
2. Melito.
Eus. ff. E. IF. 26.
MsXizcov 'OvT/Giftcii Tij) d8eX(pi7j xaiqeiv. 'En£i8fj noXXd'/ig rj^lco-
aag anovSjj T-fj jcqdg tov Xoyov %pw^/£vog, ysviadai aoi i'/Xoydg
ex Te TOV vofiov xat twv nqocprjzwv nsqt tov awTTjqog '/at ndarjg
TTjg nioTEiog fjficov, etl 8i '/at fiadslv ttjv twv naXaiwv (ii-
(SXicov ifiovXrjdrjg d'/qi^eiav, noaa tov dqidfidv '/at bnola zijv
Ta^iv Etsv, iano'v8aaa to toiovto nqd^ai, iniazdfisvog aov zd
anovdalov neqt ttjv niaziv, '/at cpiXofiadig neqt tov Xoyov, on
reading ou TCpoxEtTott may perhaps have been intended to say that such standard
writings 'are not e.\tant,' or that the subject is not mentioned, But the other
reading seems to fit better iuto what follows.

44 the NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
fiaXiGza ndvTcov nodoj tiTi nqdg Qsdv TaiJTa nqo'/qivsig, nsqt
Trjg alwviov acoTrjqiag dycoviUfievog. '.AveXdcov ovv elg T'Tjv ava-
ToXfjv, "/at scog tov Tonov yevofievog svda i'/rjq'v'xdrj '/at inqdxdrj,
xat a'/qi^wg fiadcov Td Trjg naXaidg 8Lad-^xrjg §L§Xia, vno-
Td^ag snsfiipd aoi.^ [Here follow the Books of 0. T., omitting
Esther; and then he adds] 'E^ cov '/at Tag i'/Xoydg inoirjadfirjv
sig e^ ^ifiXia 8ieXcov.
3. Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth. ^
Eus. ff. E. IF. 23.
"Etl 8i o avzdg xat neqt twv I8iwv iniOToXcov wg ^q8iovqyrj-
deiawv, Tama cprjoiv. "'EniaToXdg ydq d8eXcpwv d^iwadvTwv fie
' The force of this passage lies in the inference that a new collection of
books was known from which the Old Testament ("The old Books") was dis
tinguished. Eusebius begins the chapter by enumerating the works of Melito
upon various subjects of Christian philosophy and theology, among which he names
a work " on the Apocalypse of Jolin." He was bishop of Sardis in the time of
Marcus Aurelius. The author of Supernatural Eeligion, II. 17 (and Sanday agrees
so far with him) points to 2 Cor. iii. 6. 14 iKl tt) avayMMfe' filji; TcaXaia? fitaSij-
x.t\<; as proof that the "Old Covenant" is a phrase referring to "the doctrinal
view," not to the Books. But this does not dispose of the argument founded on
xa ¦KaXaia ptpXia as connected with iff TtaXottd Sia^TixTf). Does the author of Sup.
Eel. mean that there were no Books in the time of Melito recognized as con
taining the New Covenant? He says the date of Melito falls after A.D. 176; and if
so, such a contention is impossible. There is not much known of his date except
that his Apology was addressed to the Emperor in A.D. 170. Polycrates (in
Eus. H. E. V. 24), in his letter to Victor, speaks of him as buried in Sardis, and
terms him "MeXiTUva tov EiJMoijxov, tov it 'Aylfii TtveujjLaTi TtctvTa TCoXiTEuerajjiivov,"
and there has beeu much controversy as to whether he was literally or metapho
rically a eunuch. On Melito and his writings see Donaldson, Hist, of Christian
Literature and Doctrine, III. 221.
' Dionysius was Bishop of Corinth about A.D. 170. The extract is from
his letter to the Eomans. The question here is whether by t(3v xupiaxtov Ypa-
tptov he means the N. T. Scripture (see Lardner), the Gospels (see Donaldson),
or (as held iu Sup. Eel. II. 166) "the Scriptures of the Old Testament." For this
last no authority is adduced; and it is idle to refer to Justin's accumulation of O. T.
Scriptures predicting Christ. The author goes on (Sup. Rei. II. p. 167) to show
that Serapion found the Gospel of Peter in the third century in Rhosse, and
that Theodoret fouud (423) Tatian's Diatessaron "in esteem in our Churches;"
but this argument tells against himself. Such books were found here and there
over the Church ; but the question is whether there was all the while a consent
of the Church as a whole in favour of our N. T. Books. No one can deny that
there was such consent long before the fifth century. To prove that other than
Canonical Books existed in the time of Dionysius is superfluous ; and.if the writer's
argument is valid in establishing a parallel between the case at that date and the
case in the flfth century, it would prove that the Church as a whole had at
both dates a Canon, although in some localities special favour was shown to un
canonical books. Eusebius gives another quotation from Dionysius in the same
chapter, stating that the Epistle of Clement was daily read on the Lord's Day in

DIONYSIUS. tRENAEUS. 45
yqdipai, syqaipa. Kat Tavzag ol tov 8ia^6Xov dnoazoXoi t,iC,aviiov
yeyifii'/av, « fiiv i^aiqoZvreg, a 8s nqoaziOivzeg. Olg zd ovat
'/elzai. Ov davfiaazdv dqa, el xat twv '/vqia'/wv qq8iovqyrjaai
Tiveg intfii^XrjVzai yqacpwv, bnoTe '/at zalg ov zoiamaig ini-
§e§XTj/aai."
4. Irenaeus.
P. I. 3. 6. Kat ov fiovov i-/ zcov evayy eXi~/wv '/at twv
aTTOCTO^r.twv ' neiqdjvzui Tag dno8ei^eig jroisladai, naqarql-
novTsg Tag ^qfir^vsiag, '/at qcxSiovqyovvzsg Tag i^rjyijaeig' dXXd -/at
i'/ vofiov '/at nqocprjzwv  8Eivwg tcTi nXdofiaTi avzcov '/at
8oXiiug icpaqfioQovTsg al'/jialcoziCovaiv and TTjg dXrjdsiag Tovg firj
i8qaiav ttjv nioTiv sig ev« Qedv Ilazsqa navzo/qdzoqa v.at elg
sva Kvqiov Iqaovv Xqiazdv Tdv vldv tov Qeov 8iacpvXdaaovvag.
B. I. 6. 3. Aid 8rj '/at Td dneiqrjfieva ndvza d8eiog ol ze-
XeicnaTOi nqdrTOvaiv amwv, neqt ihv -/at yqacpat 8ia^e§aioT:vzai,
zovg noiovvzag avzd ^aaiXeiav Qeov firj -/Xtjqovofirjaeiv.'^ Kat
ydq el8coX6dvza 8iacp6qcog sadiovai, firj8i fioX-vveadai vn' avzwv
fjyoL'fiEvoi. B. II. 35. 4. Quoniam autem dictis nostris consonat praedi
catio apostolorum et domini magisterlum et prophetarum annun-
tiatio et apostolorum dictatio et legislationis miuistratio unum
eundemque omnium deum patrem laudantium. . . . Sed ne pu-
temur fugere illam, quae ex Scripturis dominicis est probationem,
ipsis Scripturis multo manifestius et clarius hoc ipsum praedi-
cantibus, his tamen qui non prave intendunt eis proprium librum,
qui sequitur has Scripturas, reddentes ex Scripturis divinis pro-
bationes apponemus in medio omnibus amantibus veritatem.
Corinth; and if so, the supremacy of Paul's doctrine was recognized. [See In
troduction: Clement.] More important is it to compare the words of Dionysius
with those of his contemporaries Melito and Irenaeus, quoted in our text regarding
"Scripture of the Lord." Eusebius devotes a chapter (H. E. IV. 23) to Dionysius,
and we learn from it that he wrote many " Catholic Epistles " to other Churches
than his own. His letter to the Romans was written while Soter was Bishop.
' These words point to a collection of "evangelical" and "apostolical"
writings. The extracts show that Irenaeus called the New Testament "Scriptures,"
like the Old. See also "Dominicis Scriptwris enutriri" (V. 20. 2). We have
also 3£tat Ypa9ai (apparently referring to both Testaments), (II. 27. 1.) He
quotes also from the Presbyters (IV. 32. 1) special testimony to the unity of the
two Testaments. 2 The reference here is to the morals of the heretics, and the reference to
Gal. V. 21 is maintained by the second clause.

46 THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
B. III. 4. 1. 2. Quid autem si neque apostoli quidem scriptu
ras reliquissent nobis, nonne oportebat ordinem sequi traditionis,
quam tradiderunt iis, quibus committebant ecclesias? Cui ordi-
nationi assentiunt multae gentes barbarorum eorum qui in Chris
tum credunt, sine charta et atramento scriptam habentes per
Spiritum in cordibus suis salutem et veterem traditionem dili-
genter custodientes.
Ep. ad Florin. (Eus. H. E. V. 20). 'Ev y ye jifjv nqoeiq-fj-
'/Ufiev nqdg tov (DXcoqlvov b Elqrjvalog ijciaTo^jj, avdig Tijg dfia
noXv/dqnci) awovaiag amov fivrjfiovevei, Xsywv. "... Kat cog
[IloXv'/aqnog] dnsfivijfiovevs zoi-g Xoyovg avzwv [sc. twv swqa'/o-
Twv TOV Kijqiov] '/at nsqt tov Kvqiov Tiva ?yV a naq' i'/sivwv
dxrj'/OEi, '/at nsqt twv 8vvafiswv avzov, '/at nsqt Trjg 8i8aa'/a-
Xiag, dig naqd avTonTwv zrjg tcorjg tov Xoyov naqsiXrjcpiog b IIo-
Xiv'/aqnog, dn'rpyysXXs ndvza avficpcova Talg yqacpalg.''^
5. Tertullian.^
Be praescript. haereticor. c. 30. Si enim Marcion Novum Tes
tamentum a Vetere separavit, posterior est eo quod separavit;
quia separare non posset, nisi quod unitum fuit.
Ibid. c. 32. Ita omnes haereses ad utramque formam a nostris
Ecclesiis provocatae, probent se quaqua putant apostolicas. Sed
> Tertullian: horn about A.D. 160, died A.D. 220-240. He was a native of
Carthage, a married man, and (according to Jerome) a Presbyter. It is not
certain where he exercised his functions as Presbyter. In ,his later days he be
came a Montanist, driven (says Jerome) from the Church by the harsh usage of
the Roman clergy. Some of his works were written after he left the Church. These
facts are almost all we know of his outer life. His character is written in his
hooks, impetuous, eloquent, sarcastic, an advocate rather than a judge. His aim
was to defend Christianity against the unworthy suspicions both of the rulers and
the ruled. So in his Apology he maintained against the heathen that Christians
had purer lives than they; iu his 'Jdv. Judaeos' he proved the superiority of
the Gospel to the law; in his 'De praescriptione haereticorum' he showed how
Catholic Christians should deal with heretics; in his treatise 'Adv. Marcionem'
he exposed the assumptions of the Gnostics. It is to be borne in mind that vvith
all his impetuosity he wrote systematically, and quoted very largely from
Scripture. In his treatises De Resurrectione, De Pudicitid, aud Adv. Marcionem
he cites in regular sequence the Scripture passages bearing on the subject in hand.
When therefore he does not quote a passage or a book which we know to bear
on his subject, we may infer that he did not know it or did not use it. He uses
all the N. T. but James, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John. Hebrews was not, however, part
of the Canon of the African Church, as is obvious from his mode of citation (see
below: 'Hebrews'). He quotes Jude as establishing the place of Enoch. See
Ronsch : Das Neue Testament TertuUians, for a compilation of his quotations.

tertullian. 47
adeo nec sunt, nec probare possunt quod non sunt, nec reci-
piuntur in pacem et communicationem ab Ecclesiis quoquo modo
apostolicis; scilicet ob diversitatem sacramenti nullo modo apos
tolicae. Ibid. c. 33. Adhibeo super haec ipsarum doctrinarum re-
cognitionem, quae tunc sub apostolis fuerunt, ab iisdem apostolis
et demonstratae et dejeratae. Nam et sic facilius traducentur:
dum aut jam tunc fuisse deprehenduntur, aut ex illis quae jam
tunc fuerunt, seminia sumpsisse. Paulus in prima ad Corinthios
(xv. 12) notat negatores et dubitatores resurrectionis. Haec opi
nio propria Sadducaeorum ; partem ejus usurpat Marcion, et Apel
les, et Valentinus, et si qui alii resurrectionem carnis infringunt.
Et ad Galatas (v. 2) scribens, invehitur in observatores et de-
fensores circumcisionis et legis: Hebionis haeresis sic est. Timo
theum instruens (1 Tim. iv. 3), nuptiarum quoque interdictores
suggillat: ita instituunt Marcion, et Apelles ejus secutor. Aequo
tangit eos, qui dicerent factam jam resurrectionem (2 Tim. ii. 3) :
id de se Valentiniani adseverant. Sed et cum genealogias inde-
terminatas nominat (1 Tim. i. 4), Valentinus agnoscitur : apud
quem Aeon ille nescio qui novi, et non unius nominis, generat e
sua Charite Sensum et Veritatem: et hi aequo procreant ex se
Sermonem et Vitam, dehinc et isti generant Hominem et Eccle
siam: de qua prima ogdoade aeonum. Exinde decem alii, et
duodecim reliqui aeones miris nominibus oriuntur, in meram fa
bulam triginta aeonum. Idem apostolus, cum improbat elementis
servientes, aliquid Hermogenis ostendit, qui materiam non natam
introducens, Deo non nato eam comparat, et ita matrem elemen-
torum deam faciens, potest ei servire quam Deo comparat. Joan
nes vero, in Apocalypsi (ii. 20), idolothyta edentes et stupra com-
mittentes jubetur castigare: sunt et nunc alii Nicolaitae, Gaiana
haeresis dicitur. At in epistola eos maxime antichristos vocat,
qui Christum negarent in camera venisse, et qui non putarent Je-
sura esse Filium Dei: illud Marcion, hoc Hebion vindicavit. Si-
monianae autem magiae disciplina, angelis serviens, utique et ipsa
inter idololatrias deputabatur, et a Petro apostolo in ipso Simone
damnabatur. Ibid. c. 34. Haec sunt, ut arbitror, genera doctrinarum ad-
ulterinarum, quae sub apostolis fuisse ab ipsis apostolis discimus:

48 THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
et tamen nullam invenimus institutionem, inter tot diversitates
perversitatum, quae de Deo creatore universorum controversiam
moverit. Nemo alterura Deum ausus est suspicari.
Ibid. c. 36. Age jam, qui voles curiositatem raelius exercere
in negotio salutis tuae, percurre Ecclesias apostolicas, apud quas
ipsae adhuc cathedrae apostolorum suis locis praesident,^ apud
quas ipsae authenticae literae^ eorum recitantur, sonantes vocem
et repraesentantes faciem uniuscujusque. Proxima est tibi Achaia,
habes Corinthum. Si non longe es a Macedonia, habes Philip-
pos, habes Thessalonicenses. Si potes in Asiam tendere, habes
Ephesum. Si autem Italiae adjaces, habes Romam, unde nobis
quoque auctoritas praesto est. Ista quara felix Ecclesia! cui to
tam doctrinam apostoh cum sanguine suo profuderunt, ubi Pe
trus passioni Dominicae adaequatur; ubi Paulus Joannis exitu
coronatur; ubi apostolus Joannes, posteaquam, in oleum igneum
demersus, nihil passus est, in insulam relegatur; videamus quid
didicerit, quid docuerit, cum Africanis quoque Ecclesiis contesse-
rarit. Unum Deum Dominum novit, Creatorem universitatis, et
Christum Jesum ex Virgine Maria, Filium Dei Creatoris, et carnis
resurrectionem: legem et prophetas cum evangelicis et apostolicis
Uteris miscet, et inde potat fidem.
Ibid. c. 37. Si haec ita se habent, ut Veritas nobis adjudi-
cetur, quicumque in ea regula incedimus quam Ecclesia ab apo
stolis, apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo tradidit, constat ratio
propositi nostri, definientis non esse admittendos haereticos ad
ineundam de Scripturis provocationem, quos sine Scripturis pro-
bamus ad Scripturas non pertinere. Si enim haeretici sunt, Chri
stiani esse non possunt, non a Christo habendo quod de sua elec-
tione sectati haereticorum nomine admittunt. Ita non Christiani,
nullum jus capiunt Christianarum literarum. Ad quos merito di-
cendum est: qui estis? quando, et unde venistis? quid in meo
agitis, non mei? quo denique, Marcion, jure silvam meam cae-
dis? qua licentia, Valentine, fontes meos transvertis? qua potes
tate, Apelles, limites meos commoves? Quid hic caeteri ad vo
luntatem vestram seminatis et pascitis? Mea est possessio; olim
^ Al. praesidentur.
' The meaning of "authenticae'' is disputed. Original? unchanged? well war
ranted by usage aud testimony? See following extract from De MonogamiA for
the same word.

TERTULLIAN. 49
possideo: habeo origines firmas, ab ipsis auctoribus quorum fuit
res. Ego sum haeres apostolorum. Sicut caverunt testamento
suo, sicut fidei coramiserunt, sicut adjuraverunt, ita teneo. Vos
certe exhaeredaverunt semper et abdicaverunt, ut extraneos, ut
inimicos. Unde autem extranei et inimici apostolis haeretici, nisi
ex diversitate doctrinae, quam unusquisque de suo arbitrio, ad
versus apostolos aut protulit, aut recepit?
Ibid. c. 38. Illic igitur et Scripturarum et expositionum ad-
ulteratio deputanda est, ubi diversitas doctrinae invenitur. Qui
bus fuit propositum aliter docendi, eos neeessitas coegit aliter
disponendi instrumenta doctrinae. , Alias enim non potuissent ali
ter docere, nisi aliter haberent per quae docerent. Sicut illis
non potuisset succedere corruptela doctrinae sine corruptela in-
struraentorura ejus; ita et nobis integritas doctrinae non compe-
tisset sine integritate eorum, per quae doctrina tractatur. Et-
enim quid contrariura nobis in nostris? quid de proprio intulimus,
ut aliquid contrariura ei quod esset in Scripturis deprehensum,
detractione, vel adjectione, vel transmutatione remediaremus ?
Quod sumus, hoc sunt Scripturae ab initio suo; ex ilhs sumus,
antequam aliter fuit, antequara a vobis interpolarentur. Cum
autem omnis interpolatio posterior credenda sit, veniens utique
ex causa aeraulationis, quae neque prior, neque domestica un
quam est ejus quod aemulatur, tam incredibile est sapienti cui
que, ut nos adulterura stilum intulisse videamur Scripturis, qui
sumus a principio et primi, quam illos non intulisse qui sunt et
posteri et adversi. Ahus manu Scripturas, alius sensus exposi-
tione intervertit. Neque enim, si Valentinus integro instrumento
uti videtur, non callidiore ingenio, quam Marcion, manus intulit
veritati. Marcion enim exserte et palam machaera, non stilo usus
est; quoniara ad raateriam suara eaedem Scripturarum confecit.
Valentinus autera pepercit, quoniara non ad materiara Scripturas,
sed materiam ad Scripturas excogitavit: et tamen plus abstulit,
et plus adjecit, auferens proprietates singulorum quoque verbo-
rura, et adjiciens dispositiones non comparentium rerum.
Adv. Marcionem, IV. 1. Oranem sententiara et omnem para-
turam impii atque sacrilegi Marcionis ad ipsum jam Evange-
liura ejus provocamus, quod interpolando suura fecit. Et ut
fidem instrueret, dotem quamdam commentatus est illi, opus ex
4

50 THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
contrarietatum oppositionibus. Antitheses cognominatum, et ad
separationem Legis et Evangelii coactum, qua duos deos divi-
dens, proinde diversos, alterum alterius Instrumenti, vel (quod
magis usui est dicere) Testamenti; ut exinde Evangelio quoque
secundum antitheses credendo patrocinaretur.
Apologeticum, c. 31. Adolati nunc sumus imperatori et men-
titi vota, quae diximus, ad evadendam scilicet vira. Plane pro-
ficit ista fallacia. Admittis nos enira probare quodcunque de-
fendiraus. Qui ergo putaveris nihil nos de salute Caesarura cu
rare, inspice Dei voces, literas nostras, quas neque ipsi suppii-
mimus et plerique casus ad extraneos transferunt. Scitote ex illis,
praeceptura esse nobis ad redundantiara benignitatis, etiam pro
inimicis Deum orare, et persecutoribus nostris bona precari. Qui
magis inimici et persecutores Christianorum, quam de quorum
majestate convenimur in crimen? Sed etiam nominatim et ma
nifesto Orate, inquit, pro regibus, et pro principibus et potestati-
bus, ut omnia tranquilla sint vobis (1 Tim. ii. 2). Cum enim con-
cutitur imperium, concussis etiam ceteris raembris ejus, utique et
nos, licet extranei a turbis aestimemur, in aliquo loco casus in-
veniraur. Be Monogamia, c. 11. Sciaraus plane non sic esse in Graeco
authentico quomodo in usum exiit per duarum syllabarum aut
callidara aut simplicem eversionem. *Si autem dormierit vir ejus
quasi de futuro sonet ac per hoc videatur ad eam pertinere quae
jara in fide virura araiserit.
Adv. Praxeam, c. 15. Si hunc articulum quaestionibus Scrip
turae veteris non expediam, de Novo Testamento sumam confir-
mationem nostrae interpretationis; ne quodcumque in Filiura re
pute, in Patrera proinde defendas. Ecce enim et in Evangeliis
et in Apostolis visibilem et invisibilem Deum deprehendo, sub
manifesta et personall distinctione conditionis utriusque.
6. Clement of Alexandria. ^
Strom. VII. (p. 836). 2g)dg ydq a-vTovg alxfiaXoyziCeiv, '/at
eavToijg avaiqslv, Tdv naXaidv avdqwnov, Tdv xazd Tag inidv-
< See 1 Cor. vii. 39. The Greek is £av SI xoi|Ji-r)3fj o' avYJp outt)?.
1 The figures refer to Potter's edition.

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. OEIGEN. 51
ftiag cpd-EiqofiEvov, dno'/TivvvvTag, '/at Tdv xaivdv dviaTdvzag k/
TOV davdTov, Trjg naXaidg SiaaTqocprjg, to te EvayysXiov, b re
an oaToXog xeXe-vovai.
Strom. VII. (p. 890). Kat ydq fieTd Td te'/eIv avv^v fiaico-
delaav, cpaai Tivsg naqdsvov EvqBdrjvai. Toiamai 8' fjfiiv al '/v-
q I a/at yqacpat, ttjV dX'ijdeiav dnoTi'/Tovaai, '/at fiivovaai naq-
divoi fiETa T'fjg ini'/qv-ipstog tiov Trjg dXrjdsiag fivazrjqiiov.
Strom. VII. (p. 890). "Exofiev ydq T'Tjv dqyfjv T^g 8i8aa'/a-
Xiag TOV K'vqiov, 8id Te tc5v nqocprjTcov, 8 id 8s tov evay
ysXiov, xat 8id TWV fia'/aqicov dnoaToXwv, noXvzqdncog '/at
noXvfisqiog iS. dqyrjg sig TsXog fjyovfievov Trjg yvojaeiog. Tfjv dqyjjv
8 e'l Tig sTsqov 8eladai 'vnoXd^oi, ov'/st av 'ovzwg dqxrj cpvXay-
delrj. '0 fiiv ovv i§ saiTov niOTdg tjj xvqiaxjj yqacpfj Te '/at
cpwvjj a^ic'mtaTog sl'/OTiog av 8id tov Kvqiov nqdg T-rjv tiov dv-
dqcincov svEqysaiav iveqyovfisvjj.
Strom. VII. (p. 891). Ei 8' ov'/ dq'/el fiovov dnXcog slnslv
TO 86^av, dXXd niaToiaaadai 8e1 Td Xsxdiv, ov ttjv i^ dvdqconiov
dvafiEVOfiEv fiaqTvqiav, d7<.Xd tjj tov Kvqiov tpwvjj niOTov-
fisda Td CrjcovfiEvov rj n.aawv dno8Ei^Ewv ixsyyvwTsqa, jidXXov
8s rj fidvTj anoSsi^ig ovaa TvyxdvEi' xad' rjv iniGTrjfirjv ol fiiv
anoysvadfiEvoi fiovov tiov yqacpwv niaToi.
7. Origen.
Hom. on Gen. XIII. 2. p. 95. ^Hoc ergo modo fodit puteos Isaac,
quos foderant pueri patris sui. Puer patris sui erat Moyses, qui
loderat puteum legis. Pueri patris sui erant David et Salomon et
prophetae et si qui alii sunt, qui libros scripserant Veteris Testa
menti, quos terrena et sordida repleverat intelligentia Judaeorum.
Quara cum vellet purgare Isaac et ostendere, quia quaecunque
lex et prophetae dixerunt, de ipso dixerunt, rixati sunt cum eo
Philistini. Sed discedit ab eis. Non enira potest esse cum eis,
qui in puteis nolunt aquam habere, sed terram. Et dicit eis:
ecce relinguetur vobis domus vestra deserta (Mat. xxiii. 38). Fodit
ergo Isaac et novos puteos, imo pueri Isaac fodiunt. Pueri sunt
• As this passage stands, Origen apparently implies that Paul was the author
of Hebrews, and he adds James and Jude to the list given as his by Eus. H.
E. VI. 25 (see before, page 9). If omnes be in the nom. (omnes N. T. puteos
fodiunt), there may be no reference to Hebrews. 4*

52 THE NEW TESTAMENT AS A WHOLE.
Isaac, Matthaeus, Marcus, Lucas et Joannes. Pueri ejus sunt Petrus,
Jacobus et Judas: puer ejus est et apostolus Paulus, qui omnes
Novi Testamenti puteos fodiunt. Sed et pro his altercantur illi
qui terrena sapiunt, nec nova condi patiuntur, nec Vetera pur-
gari. Evangelicis puteis contradicunt, apostolicis adversantur.
Et quoniara in omnibus contradicunt, in omnibus litigant, dicitur
ad eos : Quoniam indignos vos fecistis gratia Bei, ex hoc jam ad
gentes ibimus (Acts xiii. 46).
Eom. on Book of Joshua, VII. 2. p. 412. ^Veniens vero Dominus
noster Jesus Christus, cujus ille prior filius Nave designabat ad-
ventura, mittit sacerdotes apostolos suos portantes tubas ducti-
les, praedicationis magnificara coelestemque doctrinam. Sacerdo-
tali tuba primus in Evangelio suo Matthaeus increpuit, Marcus
quoque, Lucas et Joannes, suis singulis tubis sacerdotalibus ceci-
nerunt. Petrus etiam duabus epistolarum suarum personat tubis.
Jacobus quoque et Judas. Addit nihilorainus adhuc et Joannes
tuba canere per epistolas suas et Apocalypsim et Lucas Aposto
lorum gesta describens. Novissime autem ille veniens, qui dixit :
puto autem nos Beus novissimos apostolos ostendit (1 Cor. iv. 9)
et in quatuordecim epistolarum suarum fulminans tubis, muros
Jericho et omnes idololatriae machinas et philosophorum dogmata
usque ad fundamenta dejecit. 8. Lactantius.
(Institut. IF. c. 20.)
Verum scriptura omnis in duo Testamenta divisa est. Illud
quod adventum Domini passionemque Christi antecepit, i.e.. Lex
et Prophetae, Vetus dicitur. Ea vero, quae post resurrectionem
ejus scripta sunt. Novum Testamentum nominantur. Judaei Veteri
utuntur, nos Novo. Sed tamen diversa non sunt, quia Novum
Veteris adimpletio est, et in utroque idera testator est Christus.
* This passage bears the marks of being a translation, and a literal one. Rufinus
the translator is not always to be trusted. Lardner throws doubt on both this passage
and the preceding one, because they may have been altered by the translator or
by some one after him. Eufinus makes a special claim for his translation of this
part of Origen : " Ilia, quae in Jesu Nave scripsimus, simpliciter expressimus ut
invenimus et non multo cum labore transtulimus."

53
IV.
THE GOSPELS/
1. Papias.^
Eus. H. E. III. 36. Aisnqens ye frrjv xazd TO-vTovg int Trjg
.Aaiag tc5v ayroffTo^wv bjiiXrjTrjg IloX'V'/aqnog , Trjg xard 2fivqvav
ix'/XrjGiag nqdg twv avzonzwv xat vnrjqeTcov tov Kvqiov T'Tjv ini-
axon'fjv iyxExsiqiafiEvog. Kad' ov iyvaqiCsTO Ilaniag Trjg iv "^Is-
qanoXsi naqoi'/iag '/at amdg sniaxonog.
Eus. Chronic, ad Olymp. 220. 'Iwdvvrjv Tdv dsoXoyov xat dno
GToXov Elqzjvalog xat dXXoi laToqovai naqafislvai Tqr ^ioj scog tiov
Xqdvwv Tqaiavov ' ftsd' ov Ilanniag "^IsqanoXiTTjg xat Ilolv'/aqnog
2fivqvTjg iniaxonog d'/ovarat avzov iyvwqi'QovTO.
Hieron. ad Theodoram, 75. 3. Refert Irenaeus . . . Papiae
auditoris evangelistae loannis discipulus.
Iren. V. 33. 3. Praedicta itaque benedictio ad tempora regni
sine contradictione pertinet, quando regnabunt justi surgentes a
mortuis: quando et creatura renovata et liberata multitudinem
fructificabit universae escae, ex rore caeli et ex fertilitate terrae :
quemadmodum presbyteri meminerunt, qui loannem discipulura
Domini viderunt, audisse se ab eo, queraadmodura de teraporibus
illis docebat Dominus et dicebat.
"Venient dies in quibus vineae nascentur, singulae decem mil
lia palmitum habentes et in uno palmite dena millia brachiorum,
et in uno vero palmite dena millia flagellorum, et in unoquoque
flagello dena millia botruum, et in unoquoque botro dena millia
acinorura, et unumquodque acinum expressum dabit viginti quin-
• There might perhaps be printed here some fragments of a work ascribed
to Polycarp, called Besponsiones, first published by Peuardentius, from a Catena
by Victor of Capua (sixth century). They are found in Peuardentius's Notes on
Irenaeus, Haer. III. 3 (vol. II. p. 862, Stieren's Ed.). He says they were lately
found by him in an old MS written in very old characters. They point out the
different ways in which the four Evangelists begin their Gospels, &c. But they
are not accepted by scholars as genuine: even if they were Victor's Catena they
are not believed to l)e Polycarp's work. It is not thought worth while to print them.
' In the following extracts the principal references to Papias are given.
At the outset are three testifying to his age and date ; then comes Irenaeus's Ex
tract from his work ; next are the notable passages from Eusebius founding on Ire
naeus, followed by Jerome on the same subject. Some extracts from later writers
complete the series.

54 THE GOSPELS.
que raetretas vini. Et cum eorum apprehenderit aliquis sanctorum
botrum, alius clamabit: Botrus ego melior sum, me sume, per me
Dominura benedic. Similiter et granum tritici decem millia spi-
carura generaturum et unaraquamque spicam habituram decem
raillia granorum et unuraquodque granura quinque bilibres similae
clarae mundae: et reliqua autem poma et semina et herbam se
cundum congruentiam iis cousequentera : et omnia animaha iis
cibis utentia quae a terra accipiuntur, pacifica et consentanea
invicem fieri, subjecta hominibus cum omni subjectione. "
TavTa 8i '/at Ilaniag b 'iwdvvov fiiv a'/ovOTrjg, HoXv/dqnov
' 8i sTalqog ysyovibg, dqxalog avrjq, syyqdcpwg inifiaqTvqsl iv tjj
TsrdqTjj TCOV savTOv ^i^Xiwv e'gtl ydq avTc^ nsvTS (Ii^Xia avvTS-
TayjiEva. Et adiecit dicens:
"Haec autem credibilia sunt credentibus. Et luda" inquit
"proditore non credente et interrogante: quomodo ergo tales ge-
niturae a Domino perficientur? dixisse Dominum: 'Videbunt qui
venient in ilia'." —
Eus. H. E. III. 40.* XbC ^e JTania avyyqdfifiaTa nsvTE tov
aqidfidv cpsqsTai, a '/at iniysyqanTai Xoyicov xvqia'/wv i^rjy^asig.
Tovtwv xat Eiqrjvalog wg fiovwv ami^ yqacpivTwv fivrjfiovevei, tjj8s
niog Xsywv
Ta-Ora Ss xai IloiTiias laavvov jiev ctxovSTtjg, IIoXvkocqtiov Se grat-
Qoe yi-yovms , agxalog avriQ, iyyQucpcog inifiaQzvQsl iv t^ TitaQtr) tav
ectvTov §t§Xia>v. "Eaxi yap wira nivzE /3t|3ita avvrcxayiieva.
Kat b fiiv Elqrjvalog Tama. u4vT6g ys fiijv 6 Ilaniag xaTa to
nqooifiiov Tthv amov Xoywv d'/qoaT'rjv fiiv xat avTonTTjv ov8afiwg
savTdv yevsadai twv Isqwv dnoaToXwv sficpaivsi, naqsiXijcpivai 8i Ta
Trjg nioTEwg naqd twv ixsivoig yvwqifiwv 8i8daxEL, 8l' wv cprjol
Xs^BOlV •
O'iiK OKv^Gfo Si aot Knt oaa notl tlciqu xcov Tcgss^vTEQiav xaXmg
'efiad-ov xai xaXmg ifivrijuovivaa, avYKctrcttdiai raij SQiirjvsiatg, SiojSe-
jSaiovftfroj VTiiQ avrmv aXr'i&eiav. Oil yap rolg xa jioXXa Xeyovaiv I'jjatpov
uGJtlQ ot noXXol, aXXd rolg TaAij&ij SiSaaxovaiv, ovSs tolg rag aUo-
TQtag ivToXag (ivrjuovcvovGiv, aXXa roig xag noQcc xov Kvqiov rrj Ttiaiii
dBSofttivag, xai an a'vxrjg naQayivoiiivoig tijs aXrj&Btag. Ei Si nov xa\
' See Introduction (Papias) for discussion of this passage.

PAPIAS. 55
naqrjx<tXov9riy.mg tig tolg TtQsa^vtigoig 'sX9oi, tor? rcov ngsa^vxiQav
avsKQivov Xoyovg- xi 'AvSQFag rj xi IlitQog tlntv fj xl OiXmnog rj ti
@(Bftac Ij /axcojSog iJ ti 'icoavvTjg ij Mat9alog r; ti? stiQog tav toi
KvQiov ixa&fjtcov, a xe 'Aqiaximv xai 6 nQea^'vitQog 'ladvvrjg xo-v Kv
qiov iJ.ct9riTai Xiyovatv. O-ii yoQ xd ix xav ^i^Xiarv xoaovtov fiE cacpe-
Xeiv VTveXafi^avov, oaov xa TtaQa ^coGrjg q>covrjg xat fisvo'vGrjg.^
Evda xat naqaazrjaai d^iov 8tg xaTaqidfiovvTi avzc^ zd 'Iw
dvvov 'ovofia, cov Tdv ftiv nqoreqov IIsTqcj) '/at 'la'/M^Cj) /at Maz-
daicj) '/ai Tolg Xoinolg ajzoGToXoig avyxaTuXsysi, aacpaig 8tjXwv
TOV svayyeXiOT'Tjv, rdv 8' meqov 'Icodvvrjv 8iaaTeiXag tov Xoyov
iv eziqoig naqd tov twv dnooToXwv dqidfidv '/aTardaaei, nqo-
Ta^ag ai;T0i; tov 'uiqiOTicova , aacpwg Te amdv nqea(ivTeqov ovo-
fta^ei. fig '/at 8id tovtcov dno8ei'/vvGdaL T'Tjv loToqiav dXrjdrj
TCOV 8vo 'xaTd T'Tjv '.Aaiav bficovvfiia '/eyqljadai elqrj'/OTCOv, 8vo 8'
iv Ecpsaci) yevaadai fivijfiaza '/at sxdTsqov 'icodvvov szi viiv Xiye-
adai. Oig xat dvayxalov nqoaixeiv Tdv vovv sh/dg ydq ovv Tdv
8EVTEqov, El firj Tig dsXoi Tdv nqtoTOv, ttjv in ovofiaTog cpeqo-
fiivrjV .Ano'/dXvxpiv 'icodvvov swqa'/evai. Kat b vvv 8i fjfiiv 8rjXou-
fiEvog Ilaniag Toi-g fisv twv djtoGToXwv Xoyovg naqd twv amolg
naqrj'/oXovdrj/OTCov bfioXoysl naqsiXrjcpsvaL, 'u4qiaTiwvog 8i '/at tov
nqsa^vTaqov 'Icodvvov am-rpioov savTov cprjOi ysviadai. 'Ovofiaart
yovv noXXd'/ig amwv fivrjfiovsvaag iv Tolg amov avyyqdfifiaaiv
Tid-rjaiv atTwv '/at naqa86aEig. Kat Tama 8' fjfiiv ovx sig to
dxqrjaTOV elqrjadw. "u4.^iov 8i Talg dno8odeiGaig tov Ilania cpw-
valg nqoadtpai Xi^eig STsqag avzov, 8l' wv naqd8o^d ziva lazo-
qel xat dXXa, cog av ix naqa86aewg elg amdv iXdovTa. Td ftiv
" While Eusebius says that Papias acquired his information from those who
were intimate with the Elders, the grounds on which he bases his opinion, and
which he frankly states in the text, do not warrant his contradicting Irenaeus as
he does. While Papias undoubtedly endeavoured to learn as much as possible
from the friends of the Elders, his first sentence seems to claim for himself that
he learned and recorded (see Introduction) what came to him direct from these
Elders. In this passage he uses the word "Elder" for those who were Apostles
—for Peter and Thomas, as well as for the more ambiguous Philip and James.
When he calls John an Elder as well as Aristion, he does not enable us to de
cide on the question as to there being two Johns, one an Apostle, and one an
Elder only. But the Ephesian traditions which Eusebius records are probably con
clusive as to there having been two notable Elders of that name in Ephesus. It
is, however, an unwarrantable inference that is drawn from this probability, when
critics say that Irenaeus and others mistook Polycarp in what he said of his old
leader, John, and that he really meant the Elder, while they supposed he meant
the Apostle, the son of Zebedee.

56 THE GOSPELS.
ovv xaTd T'TJV 'IsqdnoXiv OiXmnov Tdv dnoGToXov dfia Talg dv-
yaTqdai 8iaTqlipai, 8Ld tcHv nqoadev 8e8^XwTai. '^i2g 8e '/aTd ^tov
amdv b Ilaniag ysvofievog 8n^yTjaiv naqeiXrjcpsvai davfiaaiav vnd
TWV TOii OiX'innov dvyaTsqwv fivrjfiovs-vsi, Ta vvv arjfisiWTEOv. Ne-
'/qov ydq avdaraaiv xaT amd'y yeyovvlav laToqel, x,at av ndXiv
STsqov naqdSo^ov neqt 'Iovgtov Tdv inixXrjdsvTa Baqaa^^dv ye-
yovdg, wg 8rjXrjT'rjqiov cpdqfiaxov ifiniovTog '/at firjSiv drj8ig 8id
T'fjv TOV Kvqiov ydqiv vnofieivavTog. Tomov 8s Tdv lovaTov fisrd
Trjv TOV acoTrjqog dvdXrjXpiv TOvg leqovg anoOToXovg fieTa MaTdia
azrjaai ze '/at ins'v^aadai dvzt tov nqo86Tov 'lov8a int Tdv '/X-Pj-
qov TTjg dvanXrjqcoaswg tov amwv dqidfiov, rj twv Ilqd^ewv w8s
nwg loToqsl yqacp'fj'^
Kal 'eatrfGav S'uo, 'IcoGrjq} tov xaXoiifievov BaQGa^^av, og snexXr/d-i^
loiarog , xa\ Mat&iav xai nQOGevldjievoi tl-nav.
Kat dXXa 8s b amdg wadv ix naqa86aswg dyqdcpov elg av-
Tov fjxovTa naqsdezo, ^ivag ts Tivag naqa^oXdg tov awTrjqog xat
8i8aa'/aXiag amov, xai Tiva dXXa fivaTi'/coTeqa. 'Ev olg '/at xiXid8a
Tiva cpratv iTwv sasadai fierd T'fjv i'/ vsxqwv dvdcTaaiv, GiOfia-
Tixcog Trjg XqiOTOv ^aaiXelag int ravTrjot Trjg yrjg vnoGTrjGofiivr^g.
u4. '/at fjyovfiai Tag ayroffToAr/tag naqe'/8e§dfisvov 8irjyfjaeig vno-
Xa§elv, rd sv vno8eiyfiaGL nqdg avzwv fivOTi'/wg elqrjfisva firj avv-
eioqaxoTa. 2cp68qa ydq tol afw/qdg Tdv vovv, coadv ex. twv a-u-
Tov Xoywv TS'/firjqdfisvov slnslv, cpaivsTai' nXrjv xat Tolg fisT'
amdv nXsiGToig baoig twv iv.xXrjGiaGTi'/tov T^g bfioiag amoi 86-
^rjg naqaiTiog ysyove, ti)v dqyaiozrjza Tdv8qdg nqo^s^Xrjfisvoig'
waneq ovv Elqrjvaicj), xat e'l Tig dXXog Td ofioia cpqovwv dvani-
cprjVEv.^ Kat dXXag 8s tjj I8icjc yqacpfj naqa8i8coaiv '^qiaTiwvog
zov nqoadsv 8e8rjXwfi&vov twv Toii Kvqiov Xoywv 8irjyrjaeig '/at tov
nqea^-msqov 'Iwdvvov naqa86asig, icp' ag Tovg cpiXofiadslg dva-
nifixpavTeg avayxaiwg vvv nqoad'fjaofisv Talg nqosxTedeiaaig a-vTov
epwvalg naqd8oaiv, rjv neqt Mdq'/ov tov to evayysXiov yeyqacpd-
Tog i'/Tsdevzai 8id tovtwv ._
Kai tovxo 6 nQea^riviQog 'iXeye. MaQxog jxev iQjirjvevtfjg IHtqov
yevofievog, oaa ijivrjuovevaev, axQi^cog ^yQaipev, o-v fiivToi xd^ei , td
* Or tou; auTou?.
* The quotation from the Acts of the Apostles is probably made by Eusebius
himself, not by Papias.
<> On the further tradition of the " Elders " preserved by Irenaeus, see under
' Irenaeus. '

PAPIAS. 57
vno xov Xqioxov ij Xeii^d-ivta rj nQttx9ivta. Ovre yag ijxovae toU
KvQiov, ourE naQrjxoXov9riaev a-vtto, vaxegov Se, cog 'ecprjv, Ilixgco, og
ngog xag xgtiag inotelxo tag SiSaaxaXiag, aXX ov^ waneg Gvvta^iv tuv
xvgiaxmv Trotov^svog Xoyicov, Saxe o'vSev ^(tagxe Mdgxog, orrwg IVta
yga'^ag tog omsfivri(i6vevaev. ^Evog ydg inoirjoato ngovotav, tov firj-
Ssv cov iixovae nagaXmslv, ij '^e'veaad-ai Tt iv wvxolg.
Tama fiiv ovv loToqrjTai Tcfj Ilania neqt tov Mdq'/ov.^ Ileqt
8i TOV MaTdaiov Tama e'Lqrjzai'
Matd-ulog (isv ovv 'E^gaiSi SiaXixtco td Xoyia avvsyQaif/ato. 'Hg-
firjvsvGE S a'iita cog ^i' Svvaxog 'ixaatog.''
KsxqrjTai 8' b amdg fiaqrvqiaig dnd Trjg 'iwdvvov nqozsqag
iniOToXrjg, xat dnd Trjg IIsTqov bfioiiog' 'E'/TsdsiTaL 8i xat dXXrjv
loToqiav neqt ywai'/dg, int noXXalg dfiaqziaig 8ia^XrjdsLaTjg int
Toi Kvqiov, rjv Td xad' '^E^qaiovg evayysXiov neqis'xei. Kat rama
8' fjfiiv avay/aiwg nqdg Tolg i'/Tedelaiv iniTeTTjq'Tjadio.
Hieronym. de vir. ill. 18. Papias, Joannis auditor, Hierapoli-
tanus in Asia Episcopus, quinque tantum scripsit volumina, quae
praenotavit "Explanatio Sermonum Domini." In quibus quum se
in praefatione asserat "non varias opiniones sequi, sed apostolos
habere auctores" ait: " Considerabam quid Andreas, quid Petrus
dixissent, quid Philippus, quid Thoraas, quid Jacobus, quid Joan
nes, quid Matthaeus, vel alius quilibet discipulorum Domini; quid
etiam Aristion et senior Joannes, discipuli Domini, loquebantur.
Non enim tantum mihi hbri ad legendum prosunt, quantum viva
vox, usque hodie in suis auctoribus personans." Ex quo apparet
in ipso catalogo nominum, alium esse Joannem, qui inter apostolos
ponitur, et alium seniorera Joannera, quem post Aristionem enu-
raerat. Hoc autera dixiraus propter superiorera opinionera, quam
* See Introduction. Papias seems merely to say that no rigid order was
followed by Mark. It is not improbable that he was defending Mark against a
charge brought against his authority on that account. See further traditions about
Mark under the head "Mark."
' Aoyioi) not necessarily "Discourses,'' as has of late been often alleged. Tet
Jerome translates the title "Explanatio Sermonum Domini." Tho word Xo'yik
seems to be equivalent in early usage to " Holy Scriptures," whether the contents
be sayings or narratives. See Eom. iii. 2; Heb. v. 12; 2 Clem. 13 (and Intro
duction on 2 Clem.). Papias does not say that in his time there was no approved
Greek version of Matthew's Gospel. It may be fairly argued that his words mean
that the time for haphazard translations was past. It is Eusebius, not Papias,
who refers to the " Gospel according to the Hebrews."

58 THE GOSPELS.
a plerisque retulimus traditam, duas posteriores epistolas Joannis
non apostoli esse, sed presbyteri. Hic dicitur mille annorum Ju-
daicara edidisse SevTsqwaiv, quem secuti sunt Irenaeus et Apolli
narius et caeteri, qui post resurrectionem aiunt in carne cum
Sanctis Dominum regnaturum. Tertullianus quoque in libro de
spe fidelium et Victorinus Petabionensis et Lactantius hac opi
nione ducuntur. [0pp. ed. Vallarsius T. II. p. 859.]
From Catenae. '.AnoXivaqiov.^ Ovx dnsdave tjj dyxovjj 'lov-
8ag, aXX ins^iw '/adaiqed-etg nqd tov dnonviyrjvai. Kat tovto
8rjXovGLv al TCOV '.AnooToXwv Ilqd^eig, otl nqrjvfjg yevofievog iXd-
'/rjos fisGog, xat i^ex'vdrj Ta anXdyxva amov. Tomo 8s aacpsoTS-
qov loToqel Ilaniag b 'iwdvvov jiadrjzfjg Xsywv omwg iv tcTi 8'
Trjg i^rjyrjOEwg twv xvqia'/Hv Xoywv
Meya di aae^eiag vnoSeiyfia ev tomco ta xoajico negiendtrjaev o
'loijSag ngria-d-elg inl toaovtov tjjv ca^xa, mate iirjSs onoQsv afia^a
QaSiag SiiQ^etai exelvov S-vvaa-^ai SteX9elv , aXXd (irjSe avxov fiovov
tov T^g xeipaXfig oyxov a'hxov. Td fiev ydg ^Xicpaga tcSv 6(p9aXiA,iov
avxov cpaal toaoStov i^oiS^aai, ag a'vtov (lev xa96Xov to cpag (if]
pxineiv , Tovg 6cp9aXiiovg Si a'vto'v (iijSi vno laxgov \_Sid'\ Sionxgag
ocp9rjvai SvvaG9ai- xoaovtov jSof&og eZ^ev ano trjg S^a9ev inicpaveiag'
TO Si alSolov a'vtov nceaTjg (iiv daxrj(ioa'vvrig drjSiategov jtat (xel^ov
cpalvea9ai, q}igsa9ai Si Si avxo'H ix navxog to'v ac6(iatog. Svggiovxag
i^agag te xai axaXfjxag elg v^giv Si a-uxav (lovav tav avayxaiav.
Metk noXXag Se ^aaavovg xa\ tifiagiag iv ISia, g>aai, ^ra^t'o) teAeu-
TjjCavrog, ano trjg oSfiijg SQrj(iov xai aoiKrjtov to ^cogiov (lixgi TJjg
vvv yevea9ai, aXX ovdi (ii%gi ffjg arj(iegov Svvaa9ai tiva ixelvov tov
Tonov naQeX9slv, iav (uij Tag glvag talg ^egalv inupga^rj' toGa^vtrj
Sid Tijg aagxog avro'O xai inl trig VVS exgvaig IjjwpijOEv.
Hieronym. ad Lucinium, Ep. 71 (28) c. 5. Porro Josephi li
bros et sanctorum Papiae et Polycarpi volumina, falsus ad te ru
mor pertulit a me esse translata; quia nec otii mei nec viriura
est, tantas res eadera in alterara linguara exprimere venustate.
• Doubtful whether Apollinaris of Hierapolis (A.D. 180), or of Laodicea
(A.D. 390). The text is from Gebhardt and Harnack, Pat. Apost. I. 187, whose
note enumerates the sources from which Hilgenfeld and others have constructed it.
The extracts which follow, by way of Catena, of some of the principal testi
monies to Papias, are according to G. & H.'s text. Their complete Catena " Pa
piae Fragmenta cum testimoniis Veterum Scriptorum" may be consulted.

PAPIAS. JUSTIN MARTYE. 59
Andreas Caesariensis in Apoc. c. 34. serm. 12. Ilanniag 8i
ovTcog int Xs^swg' "'Eviotg 8e amwv, 8i^Xa8fj tcSv ndXai dsiwv
ayysXwv, -/at T'fjg nsqt Tfjv yfjv 8iaxoafi'fjaEwg e8w/ev dqxeiv /at
'/aXwg aqxeiv naqrjyyvrjae." Kat E^fjg cprjaiv "Elg ov8iv 8sov
avvi^Tj TsXEVTrjaai t»}v Ta^tv amwv." [Edit. Morel. 0pp. St. Chry
sost. p. 52.]
Anast. Sinaita. .Aa^ovTsg Tag dq)oqfidg i/ Ilaniov tov ndvv
{navayiov?) tov "^IsqanoXiTov, tov iv {avv?) tc^ iniaTrjdiaj cpoi-
T'TjOavTog, '/at KXr'fiEVTog, IlavTaivov Trjg u4XE^av8qswv Isqiwg
'/at '.Afifiwviov aocpwzdzov, tcov dqxaiiov '/at nqiozwv avvcij8cov
E^Tjyrjvwv, elg XqiOTdv '/at TfjV i'/'/Xr/oiav ndaav Trjv e^arjfieqov
vorjadvTwv. [Contempl. anagog. in hexaem. lib. I. B. PP. Par.
1589. T. L p. 183.]
Veteres ergo ecclesiarum interpretes, Philo, inquam, philoso
phus et tempore aequalis apostolis, et Celebris Papias Hierapoli-
tanus Joannis evangelistae discipulus . . . et eorum asseclae spi
ritualiter sunt contemplati de Christi ecclesia ea quae scripta sunt
de paradise. [Lib. VIL p. 269.]
Chronic, pasch. ad Olymp. 235''. 2vv tc^ dy'ic^ 8i IloXv/dqnc^,
xat dXXoi T dnd (DiXa8eX<peiag fiaqTvqovatv sv Sfnjqvrj' xat iv
Ileqydfiip 8i sTsqot, iv oig fjv xat Ilaniag xat dXXoi noXXot, cov
'xat syyqacpa cpsqovzai ra fiaqT-vqia. [Ed. Dindorf. Vol. I. p. 481.]
Photius Biblioth. . . . ov fi-fjv dXX' ov8s Ilaniav Tdv 'Isqa-
noXewg iniaxonov xat fidqTvqa, ov8i Eiqrjvalov tov oaiov ini-
a/onov uiovy8ovviov (scil. dno8sxE'rcii ^Tscpavog), sv oig Xiyovatv
aladrjTWv tivwv ^qcajiaTwv dnoXavGiv eivat Trjv twv ovqavwv /?a-
aiXeiav. [Ed. Bekker 1824, p. 291.J
2. Justin Martyr.^
General Kefeeences io "Memoies."
Biol. c. 103. p. 331 B. (Memoirs written by Apostles and
their companions.) 'Ev ydq Tolg dnofivrjfiovevfiaaiv, a
• Here follow some general references to the written documents on which
Justin Martyr claims to have founded his statements. They are usually called
c(TCO(jLMT)}j.ovsunaTa, sometimes liaiyiXiot. The passages in Justin more closely
resembling particular passages in the Gospels will be found under the respective
headings of the Gospels in a subsequent part of this work. And further on
will be found a full citation and analysis of the principal passages containing

60 THE GOSPELS.
cpTjfit vnd TCOV dnoGToXiov avTov '/at twv ixeivoig na-
qa'/oXovd-rjadvTwv avvTSTax-dai, otl ISqcbg ihaEt d^qofi^ov
'/UTEXEiTO, amov Evxoftsvov xat XiyovTog' IZaqEXdETW, el Swutov,
TO noT'fjqiov tovto. (See Luke i. 3 and Luke xxii. 44; Mat.
xxvi. 39.)
Apol. I. c. 66. p. 98 B. (Memoirs called Gospels, and re
garded as authoritative.) Ol ydq dnoaToXoi iv Tolg yevo-
fiEVOig vn' avTwv anofivrjfiovsvfiaaiv, a xaXsiTai ev
ayy sXia, ovTwg naqi8wxav ivTSTaXd-ai aiiTolg' Tdv 'lij-
Govv Xa^ovTa aqTov, siixaqiGT-fjaavTa einelv Tomo noielTS elg
TfjV dvdfivrjoiv jiov, tovto effTt to awfid fiov '/at to noT'^qiov
bfioiiog Xa§6vTa '/at EvxaqiaT'fjaavza einelv Tovto ioTi Td aTjid
fiov xat fiovoig amolg fiETa8ovvai. (Luke xxii. 19; Mat.
xxvi. 28.)
Apol. I. c. 67. p. 98 B.^ (Meraoirs read in church.) Kal tjj
TOV fjXiov XeyofiEvjj fjjisqcf ndvTWv xutu noXsig ?j dyqcrvg
fiEvovTwv int Td avTd avviXsvaig yivsTat,, xat Td dno-
fivrjfiove'vfiaTa tcSv anooToXwv, rj Td avyyqdfifiaTa twv
nqocprjTcav dvayivtoaxeTai fiixqig iyxfJ^q^l.
Bial. c. 10. p. 227 G. (Trypho knew and read the Gospel.)
'Yfiwv 8s xat Ta iv t^ Xeyofisvo^j EvayysXLcji ^ naqayyiX-
fiaTa davfiaoTd omwg '/at jisydXa inioTafiai slvai, wg vnoXafi-
§dvsiv firj8sva 8'vvaad-ai ipvXd^ai amd' ijiot ydq ifiiXijaev svtv-
XbIv avTolg.
Bial. c. 100. p. 326 B. (Citation frora Matthew as from Td
EvayysXiov.) Kat iv t^ EvayyeXlcj) 8s ysyqanTai slntSv
ndvTa fiOL naqa8E8oTai vnd Ttyv noTqog' xat ov8etg yivtoaxst, tov
naTiqa, s'i fifj b vlog' ov8i Tdv vldv, el fifj b naT'fjq, '/at oig av b
vldg dnoxaX-vxpjj.^ (Mat. xi. 27.)
matter not in the Canonical Books. For convenience, the subject of each of the
following quotations is given as a heading.
' Justin is here describing a, common custom, so that we are to understand
that the Memoirs were usually read in Christian congregations along with the Old
Testament prophets on Sunday.
s In this and the following passage the Gospel (to EuavY^Uov) means the
Gospel generally — the Gospel Record. Origen quotes Celsus as using it in the
same sense. See Orig. cont. Cels. II. 27, and compare Iren. III. 1. 1: "ipiuf-^ eu-
aYYe^fo" (see below, p. 67).
* Justin has the same quotation (simply as words of Jesus) twice in Apol.
I. 63. In every case he has the clauses in the same order, inverting St. Matthew.
In the Apol. he has i'YVto. Matthew has TtapESoSi), ^tciy^uoxei, and poijXiQTat . . .

JUSTIN MARTYR. 61
Apol. I. c. 33. p. 75 B. (Meraoirs contain full accounts of
Jesus Christ.) ^Kat 6 aTroffTa^etg 8i nqdg amfjv Trjv naqdsvov
xaT ixelvo tov '/aiqov dyyeXog Qeov, svrjyysXiaaTo amfjv slniov
l8ov avXX'^xpj] EV yaaTqt i/ nvsvjiaTog dyiov, xat ts^jj vldv, '/at
Vldg vxpiaTov '/Xrjd^aeTai , '/at '/aXiaeig Td 'ovofta amov 'Ijjgovv,
avTog ydq acxraei Tdv Xadv amov dnd twv afiaqTiwv amov, wg ot
ano fivrjfiovEvaavTsg ndvTa Td nsqt tov aiOTrjqog fjfiwv
'Irjaov XqioTov i8i8a^av olg sniaTEvaafisv. (compare Luke
i. 31 ; Mat. i. 20, 21.)
Bial. c. 104. p. 332 B. (Justin quotes from Memoirs the in
cidents of the crucifixion.) "Onsq '/at iv Tolg dnofivrjfiovev-
fiaai Tt5v anoaToXcov avTov y iy qanTai yevofievov.
Bial. c. 105. p. 332 C. (Memoirs (John?) were Justin's
authorities.) Movoyevfjg ydq otl rjv t^ narqt twv bXwv ovTog,
l8icog i§ avTov Xoyog ymI 8'vvafiig yeysvrjfisvog, xat vGTsqov dv-
dqtonog 8id Trjg naqdsvov yevofievog, wg dnd Tt5v dnofivrj-
fiovEvfiaTcov sfidd-ofisv, nqoE8fjXioaa '/.t.X. (John i. 18.)
Bial. c. 105. p. 333 B. (Justin studied the Memoirs.) Kat
ydq ano8L8ovg Td nvsvfia int ti^ GTavqi^ sine' IldTsq, elg x£l-
qdg aov naqaTidefiai Td nvevfid fiov wg '/at ix twv dno-
fivrjfiovEVfidTwv xat tovto s'fiadov. (Luke xxiii. 46.)
Bial. c. 106. p. 333 C. (The Memoirs condensed.) "Ot£ ioTav-
qcadrj xat fisT amcav 8idywv vfivrjGe tov Qedv, wg xat sv Tolg
dnofivrjfiovevfiaai Tt3v dnoGToXiov 8rjXovTai yeysvrjfis-
vov. (Luke xxiv. 25, 26; Mat. xxvi. 30.)
Bial. c. 88. p. 315 B. (Apostolic writings quoted for part of
a narrative.) Kat tote iXdovTog tov 'Itjgov int Tdv 'loq8dvrjv no-
TUfidv, svda b Iwdvvrjg i^dnTi^s, xaTsXdovTog tov IrjOov int Td
v8coq xat nvq avfjcpdrj iv tc^ 'loq8dvjj' xat dva8-vvTog avTOv
dnd TOV vSaTog tag nsqiaTsqdv Td dyiov nvsvfia ini-
nTrjvai in avTov syqaxpav ol dnoOToXoi a-vTov to'vtov
TOV XqiOTov fjfiwv.^ (Mat. iii. 16.)
Bial. c. 106. p. 333 B. (St. Mark's Gospel apparently quoted
as Peter's.) Kal to slnslv fisTcovofiaxivai amdv lUrqov sva tcov
anoGToXwv, xat yeyqdcpdai iv Tolg dnofivrjfiove'VfiaaLV
anoxaX\j>|jat. The passage is quoted in various ways by early writers. See Iren.
L 20. 3.
* On the Apocryphal addition to this passage see on Mat. iii. 13.

62 THE GOSPELS.
avTov ysysvrjfiEvov. Kat tovto, fisTU tov '/at aXXovg 8vo
aSsXcpovg, vlovg Zs^sSaiov 'ovTag, ftsTtovofia/svat ovdjiaTt tov Bo-
avsqyig, o ianv viot ^qovTrjg x.t.X.^ (Mark iii. 16, 17.)
Passages in which Justin ExpaEssir claims to cite the Memoies.
Apol. I. c. 66. p. 9SB. ' Ol ydq dnoaToXoi iv Tolg ysvojisvoig
vn avTwv anojivrjfiovs'vfiaatv, a "xaXslTat svayysXta, omwg naqi-
8wxav ivTETaXdat amolg' Tdv 'Irjaovv Xa^ovTa dqTov EvyaqiaT'Tj-
aavTa einelv Tovto noielTe slgTfjv dvdfivrjaiv fiov, tovto
ioTi Td awfid fiov Kat Td noT'fjqiov bfioiiog Xa^ovTa -/at
EV'xaq taT'fja avT a slnslv Tovto saTi zd a'tfid fiov, '/at
fiovotg avTolg fisTa8ovvat. [Quoted also in previous section.]
(Luke xxii. 19 ; Mat. xxvi. 28.)
Bial. c. 49. p. 269 A. ^ Jid '/at b fjfiiTeqog XqiaTdg elqrf/eL
int y^g Toze Tolg Xsyovai nqd tov XqiGTOv 'HXiav 8e1v iXdslv
HXiag fiiv sXsvasTat xat dno'/aTaaTrjaet ndvTa' Xsyw
8i Vfilv OTt HXiag rj8rj rjXds, xat ovx iniyvwaav av-
Tov, aXX inoirjaav a-vTcp baa -fjdsXrjOav. Kat ysyqan-
* If aijTOu refer to Christ, it is a solitary case of Justin making aK0|j.v. go
vern the Genitive of the subject. The passage is now usually understood to de
scribe Mark's Gospel as "Peter's Memoirs." In Mark alone of our Gospels is
the incident recorded. Another reference to this is Dial. c. 100. p. 327 B (see below,
" Matthew"). ' See above. There can be no doubt that Justin does not here correctly
quote any one of our Canonical authorities. It is possible that he intended to
give (as he certainly does give) an account substantially corresponding to that
of the Memoirs, "not merely quotations of words, but concise narratives" (West
cott, Canon, p. 116, third edition). But it is more probable that he intended to
give the very words and failed. In those days (as any minister's experience will
testify in our own days) the words of institution when given from memory were
seldom quoted with perfect accuracy from any one source. Justin was too fa
miliar with the words to think of turning to the Gospel MS for them ; and yet
his very familiarity was not in favour of verbal accuracy. There is no need to
suppose (though there is no reason why we should not admit it if necessary) that
Justin's own words are found in some one written authority. Hence it is a fal
lacy to say "Justin is giving an account of the most solemn sacrament of his re
ligion. Here if ever we might reasonably expect accuracy and care" (Supernatural
Religion, I p. 390, second edition). See Luke xxii. 17; 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25, for words
most nearly Justin's. Compare Mat. xxvi. 26; Mark xiv. 22.
' This quotation (from Memoirs?) is verbally exact so far as regards tho
last part (Mat. xvii. 13) introduced by yi-^pa-KTai. The earlier part has ^XEUOSTOtt
for Spxetat; and £-izoL-r]aaM auTui for feo(if)aav h auTu, both being such changes
as Justin is in the habit of making, that the Greek may take a less peculiar form
than in the Gospels. The omission of ^m before auTU is now confirmed by the
best MSS. This is also the reading of Mark ix. 13. Justin has the future ikt-i-
oea^ac before in the same chapter. See also p. 268 C.

JUSTIN MARTYR. 63
Tat, OTL Tots Gvvij'/av ol fiadrjTat otl neqt 'Iwdvvov
TOV ^anTiGTov s\nev avTolg. (Mat. xvii. 11-13.)
Bial. c. 100. p. 326 B. ^ Kat iv tc]) evayyeXici) 8i ysyqanTai
elncov ndvTa fiot naqaSsSoTat vnd tov nuTqdg, xat
ov8stg yivcoa'/ei Tdv naTsqa el fifj b vldg, ov8i Tdv
vldv sl fifj b naTrjq xat olg av b vldg dno'/aX-vxpjj. (Mat.
xi. 27; Lukex. 22.)
Bial. c. 101. p. 328 B. * Ol ydq decoqovvzeg amdv ioTavqwfii-
vov xat '/ecpaXdg s'/aaTog i'/ivovv '/at Td x^cXtj Stiazqscpov xat zolg
fiv^wTrjqaiv iv dXX-fjXoig Sieqivovvreg s'Xsyov elqwvevofisvot Tama
a xat iv Tolg dnofivrjfiove-vfiaai twv aTrocTTo'ylwv a'mov ysyqanTai'
Yldv Qeov savTdv sXeye, xaTa/Jag nsqtnaTsiTco' awadTco
amdv 6 ©eo'g. (Mat. xxvii. 39, 40, 43 ; Luke xxiii. 35.)
Bial. c. 103. p. 331 B. ^ Kat ydq omog b 8td^oXog dfia ti^
ava^fjvai amdv dnd tov nozafiov tov 'Ioq8dvov, Trjg cpwvrjg amio
Xexdeiarjg' Ylog fiov et av, iyw O'fjfieqov ysysvvrj/d as' iv Tolg
dnofivr^fiovsvfiaat twv dnoaToXwv ysyqanTai nqoasXdcfiv am^ '/at
neiqd'Qwv fiixqt tov einelv amc^' Ilqoa'/'vvrjaov fiot' '/at dno-
xqivaadai amc^ Tdv XqiaTov "Ynaye dniaw jiov, aaTavd'
K'vqiov Tdv Qeov aov nqoa'/vvfjoeig '/at avTi^ fiovcp
XuTqevaetg. (Mat. iv. 9, 10; Luke iv. 7, 8.)
° See note (4) in last section on this passage.
* See also Apol. I. c. 38. Justin is arguing from the fulfilment of Psalm xxii.,
where it is said that enemies pierced the sufferer's hands and feet, and stared
upon him &c., and his words are an undeniable amplification of the canonical
account. It is not unreasonable to suppose that of those last deeds done at Jeru
salem there were many accounts ; and that Justin in these two passages con
sciously or unconsciously departs from the Memoirs as we have them. But his
source we do not know. In the Apol. the words are, Kal zctXiv orav XeyT) " 'EXcf-
Xtjoav h XEtXemv, £x(vT)aav xe<paXY)v X^yovte;* 'PuoaaSu eauTo'v. (Ps. xxii. 7, 8.)
" AxivonzdtxoL oTt yiyotvt \jtc6 tuv 'louSaiuv tu XpiOTU, fxaieiM SuvaaSc. Stau-
pu3^vT0? Y"P "UToO £?£(JTp£(poM Ta X^f^in "Ot'' ^xivouv Ta; xstpaXd? Xeyovte;- 'O
vexpoOi; avEYtipa; puodsiu lauTo'v.
8 A comparison of this narrative with the narratives of Matthew and Luke
shows various divergences of small moment. Thus o'tciou |j.ou is inserted (as
in Cod. D), though contrary to the best MSS, and the Aorist TCpoaxuvYjaov stands
instead of iat TCpoaxuvtjoT];, and the words y^YP*'^^'" V^P "¦'^ omitted. This is
only like Justin's usual inaccurate mode of quotation. On the ground of the in
accuracies, it has been argued that Justin had another MS authority than our
Gospels before him here. But it so happens that Justin again quotes the same
passage (Dial. c. 125. p. 354 D) saying, u; TcposiTCOV, TcpoaiiXSsv auTU o' Stoi-
PoXos, and then goes on to speak of Tipodxuv^aat auTov, giving as Christ's final
answer y^YP*'^'''*' ' Kupiov tov Seo'v sou Ttpoaxuvin'aei; xai auru (aovco XoTpeuaet;.
Here he omits the OTtfau (aou and inserts y^YP"'^'^'"' * significant commentary on
the futility of arguing as though Justin were minutely accurate, or even strictly con
sistent with himself, in his quotations.

64 THE GOSPELS.
Bial. c. 103. p. 331 B. ^Kat to 'i2aei v8coq s^exvdrj xat Sie-
axoqniad-Tj ndvza Td oaTa fiov, iyevfjdrj fj xaq8ia jiov loaet '/rjqog
TTj'/dfievog iv fiiaoj Trjg xoiXiag fiov, bneq ysyovev amc^ i'/eivrjg Trjg
vvxTdg, OTe in' amdv i^fjXdov elg to 'oqog twv iXaicov avXXa^elv
aircdv, nqoayyeXia ijV. 'Ev ydq Tolg dnofivrjfiovevjiaGLV, d cprjfii
vnd TCOV dnoGToXwv amoij '/at twv i'/eivoig naqaxoXovdrjadvTwv
awzeTaxdai, ort l8qcog ifrast d-qcrfi^oi '/aTSxeiTO, amov ev'/o-
ftsvov xat XsyovTog' IlaqeXd-sTw, el SvvaTOv, Td noTrjqiov
TOVTO. (Mat. xxvi. 39; comp. Luke xxii. 42.)
Bial. c. 105. p. 333 B. ' Kat ydq dno8i8ovg Td nvevjia int
TCj) GTovq^ sine' IldTeq, elg y^l^^S o'Of naqaTidsjiai Td
nvevfid fiov' wg '/at ex tc5v dnojivrjfiovevfiaTWv '/at tovzo s'fia
dov. (Luke xxiii. 46.)
Bial. c. 106. p. 333 B. * Taika e'lqrjxivat iv Tolg dnoftvrjjio-
vevfiaai ysyqanTai' 'Eav fifj nsqtaas'vaji vfiwvfj 8ixaioavvrj
nXslov TWV yqafifiuTEWv xat Oaqi'aatwv, ov fifj elaiX-
d-rjTe elg Trjv ^aaiXsiav twv o^^avcSv. (Mat. v. 20.)
Bial. C. 107. p. 334 B. ^ Kat otl tjj TqiTjj fjfiiqa sfisXXev
dvaaT-fjaeadat fieTa Td OTavqwdrjvai, yiyqanTat iv Tolg dnofivrj-
fiovevfiaaiv oti ol and tov yivovg vfiwv avCrjTovvTeg amcp s'Xsyov,
OTt /lel^ov fjfiiv arjfielov. Kat dne'/qivaTo amolg' Feved no-
VYjqd xat fiotxaXtg arjfielov sni^rjTSi, xat arjjislov ov
8odrjaeTat avTolg el fiij to arjfielov 'Iwvd. (Mat. xii. 39.)
" See first passage, p. 59. The quotation from the Memoirs agrees with our
Gospel of Luke (Luke xxii. 44) for the sweat, save that a?(JiaTo; is omitted (Spojxpo;
itself means a gout or clot of blood). The prayer of Jesus resembles Matthew
xxvi. 39 more closely than Luke. In Dial. c. 99. p. 326 B, Justin quotes the
prayer again, but not in the same words, yiu^eto \iytit-t - itaTEp, zl SuvoTov iQXi, Tcap-
eXS^tu to TtOTiiiptov ToiJTO an' £(JloC. If therefore Justin quoted correctly from his
author in the one case, he did not in the other. This difficulty cannot be over
come by those who suppose Justin to have followed his Gospel accurately. The
rest of the prayer was, according to Justin (Dial. c. 99), Kal (JiEtd toOto euxo-
(i£vo; XeYEt ' Miq u; ^y^* pouX6p.at aXX' u; uu S^Xei; , which agrees with neitlier
Mattliew nor Luke, but is more like Matthew. Everything points to Justin's com
bining the narratives as suited himself or as his memory enabled him. No argu
ment can be founded on the supposition that he was careful or successful in re
producing his sources.
' Verbatim from Luke xxiii. 46.
* This quotation is exact, 0|jt.uv ii 8txatoauvY) being the correct reading.
« This is Mat. xii. 39 verbatim, save that Justin reads auTOf; for auTT], and
that he does not add tou Ttpo^iQTOU after 'luva.

LETTER TO DIOGNETUS. THE EVANGELISTS AT TRAJAN'S TIME. 65
3. Letter to Diognetus. ^
C. 11. EiTu cp6§og vofiov aSsTai '/at nqocpTjTwv x«?*e yivci)-
G'/ezat '/at evayysXiwv nioTig 'i8qvTai '/at d7t0GT6Xwv naqd8oaig
cpvXdaasTai '/at i'/xXrjaiag x'^Q'-S a-/iqTa.
4. The Evangelists at Trajan's time.
Eus. H. E. III. 37. Kat ydq 8fj nXslazoi tcov tote fiadrj-
Twv Gcpo8qoTiqfj) cpiXoaocpiag s'qwTi nqdg tov dsiov Xoyov ttjv
ifj'vxfjv dvaqna'QofiEvot, Trjv awT'fjqiov nqoTeqov dnenXfjqovv naqa-
'/sXevaiv, ivSsiai vsfiovTsg zdg ovaiag, bItu 8i dno8rjfiiag arsX-
Xofisvot s'qyov ineTsXovv evayyeXiaTwv, Tolg stl ndfinav dvrj/ooig
Toil Trjg nioTBwg Xoyov xrjqvTTSiv Tdv XqiGTdv cpiXoTifio'Vfisvoi, xat
TfjV TWV dsiwv evayy eX'iwv naqaSidovai yqacpiqv.^
• The ' Epistle to Diognetus ' was at one time ascribed to Justin Martyr on
the strength of a title apparently ascribing it to him in a MS of probably the
thirteenth or fourteenth century. It follows some works in Justin's name, but not
-now regarded as his. The Ep. to Diognetus makes ample use of Paul, and if it
were Justin's would be very valuable. The external objections to the Justinian
authorship are: (1) It is not quoted or alluded to — so far as is known — by
any Christian writer of antiquity. (2) The MS itself (which was burned in the
fires of Strassburg during the recent Franco-German war) is of very dubious
authority. (It is not absolutely inconceivable that Henry Stephens, its editor, was
also its author. See Donaldson, Christian Literature, II. 142.) Its value is dis
puted on the following internal grounds: (1) Its style is not Justin's. (2) Its use of
Scripture is not like Justin's. (3) Its mode of dealing with the religions of Judea,
Greece, and Eome is not Justin's. To (1) and (2) plausible replies may be
easily made ; hut (3) seems to me insurmountable. Justin's respectful, though
faithful, handling of the great faiths with which Christianity contended is very
unlike the contemptuous tone of the writer of the Epistle. While the reference
in the text is given for the sake of completeness, it cannot be founded upon. The
date may be from the end of the second to the beginning of the fourth century;
or it may be the fiction of a later time. It follows Justin here, because of its
association with his works. The text is from Gebhardt and Harnack (1875).
The eleventh and twelfth chapters are supposed by some to be by a later hand
than the ten which precede. See Cotterill's Peregrinus Proteus, p. 131.
> There can be no doubt from the context that Eusebius is describing the
first age after the Apostles. The words with which he closes the paragraph and
introduces Ignatius and Clement of Rome are interesting to the student of eccle
siastical offices, as well as useful for our present purpose. He says: 'ASuvdrou 6e
ovTo; tjixiv aitavTa; i^ ovojuaTO? d;iaptin£to5ai, ocrot tcote xard ti^v oixoufi^viqv £x-
xXtjoio; y^Y'^^'^^' 7cot(Ji£vES ¦^ xai suaYYEXtoTal, toutuv sixoTU? Vi o'vofJiaTO? YP'^Vfi
(io'vUV TTIV [JlVlll|jn)V xaT£3£'(JlES0 , (Jv iTt xai vuv £?? KlV'^'J 8t' U7t0|XVT)ftdTUV TT);
dTCoaToXtxiji; SiSaaxaXia; y] TtopdSoat; cpE'pErai. He says that very many mar
vellous miracles were wrought (tltsixt. tote) by those men. There is an interest
ing passage in 2 Clement, c. 2, where after quoting Is. liv. 1 &o. the writer says:
'EtceI iJpTlfJios ^So'xEt £!vat a'lco tou 0eou o Xoo? in,«Jiuv, vuvl 8e miTTEuaavTEs
5

66 the gospels.
5. Quadratus.^
Eus. H. E. IV. 3. Tov 8i 2wTrjqog fjfiwv Ta s'qya det naqrjv.
'.AXrjdrj ydq rjv ol deqanevdivTsg, ol dvaaxdvTSg i/ vs/qiov, o'i
ovx wcpdrjoav fiovov deqanevofievot, xat aviOTdfievoi, aXXd xat aet
naqovTsg' ov8i iniSrjfiovvTog fiovov tov 2wTrjqog dXXd '/at anaX-
Xays'VTog, rfiav int XQOVOV I'/avdv, wote '/at sig Tovg fjfiETsqovg
xqovovg Tivsg amwv dcpixovTO. 6. Irenaeus.
B. III. 1. Non enim per alios dispositionera salutis nostrae
cognoviraus, quara per eos per quos evangelium pervenit ad nos :
quod quidera tunc praeconaverunt, postea vero per Dei volunta-
tera in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt, fundamentum et columnam
fidei nostrae futurum. Nec enira fas est dicere, quoniam ante
praedicaverunt quam perfectam haberent agnitionem; sicut qui-
dara audent dicere, gloriantes eraendatores se esse apostolorura.
Postea enira quara surrexit Dominus noster a mortuis ct induti
sunt supervenientis Spiritus Sancti virtutem ex alto, de omnibus
adimpleti sunt, et habuerunt perfectara agnitionem; exicrunt in
fines terrae, ea quae a Deo nobis bona sunt evangelizantes, et
coelestem pacem hominibus annuntiantes, qui quidera et oranes
pariter et singuli eorura habentes evangelium Dei.
tcXeCove; £y^^°V^S" '^^ 8oxouvtuv 1-fzi.t 6eov. By ol SoxoCvte; he no doubt
meant the Jews; and by Xao'; he seems from the context to have meant the
Christian community.
' Quadratus presented his Apology to Hadrian, and it was known to Euse
bius, who praises it in high terms. It was a vindication of the purity of the life
of Christians. From his statement that some of those on whom the Saviour's mi
racles had been wrought survived to his time, it is possible that he is the same
Quadratus of whom the historian speaks elsewhere as having the gift of prophecy
at the time when the daughters of Philip were similarly endowed (H. E. III. 37).
It is not certain that he was the Athenian Bishop mentioned in the letter of Dio
nysius of Corinth (Eus. H. E. IV. 23). Nor indeed is anything more known of
him with certainty than what Eusebius says in introducing the extract in our text.
— He adds that Aristides also presented an Apology along with Quadratus (Ttapa-
hXt)ct(uc) which was extant in the possession of very many. At the same date
(the time of Hadrian) Agrippa Castor wrote against Basilides (Eus. H. E. IV. 7).
He was the first who wrote against heresy. The writings of Tatian, Athenagoras,
Theophilus, and Melito are quoted in our text. With those mentioned in this note
and the doubtful Hermias they make up the 'Apologists.' See Donaldson, 'Hist.
of Christian Literature and Doctrine,' II. 4.

irenaeus. 67
^'O ftiv 8fj MaTdalog iv rolg 'E^qaioig tjj I8icf. SiaXi'/TO) av
Twv, '/at yqacpfjV i^-fjvsyxev EvayysXiov, zov Ilizqav '/at tov Ilav
Xov lv 'Ptofijj svayysXi^ofisvwv xat dEfisXiovvTwv Tfjv i'/'/Xrjoiav.
MsTd 8i TTJV TOVTWV s'^o8ov, Mdqxog b fiadrjzfjg xat sqfirjvsvzfjg
IIsTqov xat amdg Ta find Ilszqov '/rjqvaaojisva iyyqdcpiog fjfiiv
naqa8s8w'/s. Kat ytov/dg 8i b dxoXovdog IlavXov, zd vn' i/eivov
"/rjqvaaofievov evayyiXiov iv ^i^Xiqr xaTsdeTO. "EneiTa 'iwdvvvg^^ b
fiad-rjrfjg tov Kvqiov, b '/at int Td arxjdog amov dvansaiov, xat
amdg i§s8w'/e to evayyiXiov, iv 'Ecpiaci) Trjg '^aiag 8iaTqi§cov.^
B. III. 11. 7. Et haec quideml sunt principia Evangelii,
unum Deum fabricatorem hujus universitatis, eum qui et per
prophetas sit annunciatus, et qui per Moysem legis dispositio
nem fecerit, patrera Domini nostri Jesu Christi annunciaptia, et
praeter hunc alterum Deum nescientia, neque ialterum Patrem.
Tanta est autem circa Evangelia haec firmitas, ut et ipsi haere
tici testiraoniura reddant eis, et ex ipsis egrediens unusquisque
eorum conetur suam confirmare doctrinam. Ebionaei eteuim eo
Evangelio, quod est secundum Matthaeum, ^ solo utentes, ex illo
ipso convincuntur, non recte praesuraentes de Domino. Marcion
autem id quod est secundum Lucam circumcidens, ex his quae
adhuc servantur penes eum, blasphemus in solum existentem Deum
ostenditur. Qui autera Jesum separant a Christo, et impassibi-
lem perseverasse Christum, passura vero Jesum dicunt, id quod
secundum Marcum est praeferentes Evangelium, cum araore ve
ritatis legentes illud, corrigi possunt. Hi autem qui a Valentino
sunt, eo quod est secundum Joannem plenissime utentes ad osten-
sionera conjugationura suarum, ex ipso detegentur nihil recte di
centes, quemadmodum ostendiraus in prirao libro. Cura ergo hi

> From Eus. H. E. V. 8.
2 See further Eus. H. E. H. 15; III. 24; VI. 14. The traditions regarding
the origin of the Gospels vary. Regarding Matthew's Gospel and its relation to
the Gospel of the Hebrews, see Introduction, ' Gospel of Hebrews. ' As regards
Mark, whether 4'|o8ov means death or departure from the city, Irenaeus is in conflict
with Eus. H. E. VI. 14, because Eusebius distinctly says Peter was made aware of
Mark's Gospel. See also II. 16. "ExSoO'.v for i'goSov is probably an attempt to
get over the difficulty. As regards Mark's relation to Peter, and Luke's to Paul,
traditionary testimony agrees, that in each case the Evangelist reduced to writing
the substance of his Master's teaching. As regards John, see Introduction, and
the passages quoted below; and compare Clement's account (below, p. 74).
' See Introduction: 'Gospel of Hebrews.' 5*

68 THE GOSPELS.
qui contradicunt, nobis testimonium perhibeant, et utantur his,
firma et vera est nostra de illis ostensio.
B. III. 11. 8. Neque autem plura numero quam haec sunt,
neque rursus pauciora capit esse Evangelia.*
'EneiSfj . . . Tsaaaqa xXifiaTa tov '/6a fiov, iv cp iafiiv slat,
xat Tsaaaqa xadoXi'/d nvEVfiaTa, xaTianaqTat 8i fj i'/xXrjoia int
ndarjg Trjg yrjg, aTvXog 8i '/at OT'fjqtyfia ixxXrjaiag to svayysXiov,
'/at nvevfia Cwrjg' slxoTwg Tsaaaqag sxstv avTfjv OTvXovg, navTa-
Xodsv nvsovTag ttjv dq)daqaiav, '/at dva^wnvqov'VTag TOvg dvd-qio-
novg. 'E^ wv cpavsqdv, otl b twv dndvTwv TsxviTrjg .Aoyog, b
'/adrjfiEVog int twv Xsqov^tfi xat avvs^wv Ta ndvTa, cpaveqwdetg
Tolg dvdqcanoig, e8w/ev fjfiiv TSTqdfioqcpov Td EvayyiXiov, svt 8i
nvEVfiaTi avvEXOfiEvov. Kadcijg 6 Ja^tS a'lTO'VfiEvog avrov ttjv
naqovaiav , cprjaiv b xadrjfievog int tcDv Xsqov^tfi, inicpdvrjdi.
Kat ydq Ta Xeqov^tfi TETqanqoawna ' '/at Ta nqoawna avTwv el-
xovsg TTjg nqayfiuTsiag tov vlov tov Qeov. Td fiiv ydq nqwTOv
^wov, cprjaiv, Ofioiov XsovTt' to Sfinqa'/Tov amov xat fjysfiovtxdv '/at
^aatXixdv xotqaxTrjqi^ov ' Td 8i Semeqov ofioiov fioax^, ttjv Isqovq-
yi'/fjv xat leqaTtxfjv Td^tv ificpalvov to 8i zqiTov sxov nqoawnov
dvd-qwnov, t^ xaTa avdqwnov a-vTOV naqovaiav cpaveqdTaTa 8ia-
yqdcpov to de TsraqTOv bfioiov dsTCji nsTojiEVCj), T-fjV tov nvsvfia-
Tog int TfjV ixxXrjoiav icpinTUfiivov 86atv aacprjvi^ov. Kat tu
evayy sXta ovv Tomoig arjficpwva,^ iv oig iyxadi^eTai XqiaTog. Td
fiiv ydq xaTa 'Iwavvr/V,^ Tfp> and tov noTqdg fjysfiovi'/'fjv amov. . . .
xat svSo^ov ysvsdv SirjyslTat, Xsyov sv dqxjj rjv b udoyog xat
ndvza 8i' ovtov sysveTO' '/at z^gig a^Toi; syivsTo ovSi sv ....
Td 8i '/aTa .Aovxdv, ots leqaTixov x«?«>iT^?og vndqxov, dnd tov
Zaxaqiov tov leqswg dvfiiwvzog Tip Qecp rjq^aTO. "H8rj ydq b ai-
TB'VTog fjzotfid^ETo fioaxog vniq Tfjg avsvqsaswg tov vscoTsqov nai-
8dg fiiXXwv dvsadai. MaTdalog 8i ttjv xaTd dvd-qwnov amov
yiwrjOiv 'xrjqvTTSt, Xsywv Bi^Xog ysviaewg 'irjGov XqiGTOv, vlov
* See before, note on Justin, Dial. c. 227. Ign. Philad. c. 5 has apparently
EuaYY^Xtov and aitoaToXoi, as the divisions of the N .T. The ' Gospel ' and the
'Apostles' became well-known divisions after Clem. Alex. The Greek of the follow
ing notable passage was found by Grabe in the Quaestiones of Anastasius Sinaita.
* Or au|jt|j.opcpa.
* The Latin version is : Aliud enim illam, quae est a Patre, principalem et
efficabilem et gloriosam generationem ejus euarrat dicens sic, &c. The words xai
SuitpaxTOv seem to have dropped out.

IRENAEUS. 69
Ja§t8, vlofi) '.A^qadfi. Kat' tov 8e 'Irjaov XqiaTov fj yivvrjoig
ovTwg ijv. .Avdqwnofioqcpov ovv Td svayysXiov tovto 
MaQxog de aicd tov nqocprjTi'/ov nvsvfiaTog tov i^ vxpovg iniovTog
Tolg avdqconoig, Tfjv aqxfjv inoffjauTO, Xiywv • 'u4qxfj tov evayyeXiov
Irjaov XqiGTOv, cog ysyqanTai iv 'Haatci t^ nqocpiqzjj' Trjv nTS-
qwTi'/fjV el'/ova tov evayyeXiov 8er/vrjwv 8id tovzo 8i '/at avv-
TOfiov xat naqazqiyovaav TfjV "/azayyeXiav nenoirjzai' nqocprjTi'/dg
ydq b xapaxTij^ oiiTOg. Kat amdg 8i b Xoyog tow ©eoti TOig fiiv
nqd Mwvaicog naTqidqyaig, xaTa Td dsi'/dv '/at evSo^ov wfiiXst'
Tolg 8i iv tiT) vofuij, IsqaTi'/fjv .... Ta'^tv dnivEifis. MsTd 8i
Taika avdqconog ysvofisvog, ttjv 8wqEdv tov dyiov nvs'VfiuTog elg
ndaav i^sns flips Trjv yrjv, a'/sna^wv fjfidg Talg samov nTiqv^iv.
'Onoia ovv fj nqayfiarsia tov vlov tov Qeov, zoiamrj '/at twv
t,d)wv fj fioqcp-fj' '/at bn'oia fj twv Cwwv fioqcpfj, TOiomog xat b
Xaqa'/Trjq tov EvayysXiov. Tszqdfioqcpa ydq Ta ^wa, TSTqdfioqcpov
'/at Td E'vayyiXiov, '/at fj nqayfiaTsia tov Kvqiov. Kat 8id tovto
Tsaaaqsg i86drjaav '/adoXixat 8tadrj/at tjj dvdqwnoTrjzt' fiia fiiv
TOV '/aTa'/XvOfiov tov Nwe, int tov to^ov ' 8EVTEqa 8s tov '.A^qadfi
int TOV arjfisiov Trjg nsqiTOfifjg' TqiTTj 8i fj vofiodeaia int tov
McoiJaswg' zerdqzrj 8i fj tov evayyeXiov, 8td tov Kvqiov fjfiwv 'Irj
aov XqiOTOv.
§ 9. Tovtwv de otiTwg e/dvTWv, fidTaioi ndvzeg xat dfiadelg,
nqoasTt 8i xat ToXfirjqot ol ddeTovvTeg ttjv I8iav tov evayyeXiov,
'/at e'l'ce nXeiova, elVe iXdTTOva tcov elqrjjiivwv naqsigcpiqovTSg
EvayysXiwv nqoawna' ol fiiv, liva nXsiova 86^wat T^g dXrjdsiag
i^Evqrjxivai' ol de, iva Tag oi'/ovofiiag tov Qeov ddeTi^awaiv.
Etenim Marcion totura rejiciens Evangeliura, iramo vere se
ipsum abscindens ab Evangelio, partem gloriatur se habere Evan-
gehi.' Alii vero ut donura Spiritus frustrentur,* quod in novis
simis temporibus secundum placitum Patris efFusum est in hu
raanum genus, illam speciem non admittunt, quae est secundura
Joannis Evangeliura, in qua Paracletura se missurum Dominus
^ Another reading is "jjonfcj* gloriatur se habere Evangelium. " This would be
an allusion to the previous description of the Gospel as four-formed.
* Some have supposed the Montanists to be here described. But the Alogi,
who rejected the Johannine portion of the four-formed Gospel, are more prob
ably meant. See under John's Gospel. The Montanists claimed the gift of pro
phecy; but they did not reject the Fourth Gospel.

70 THE GOSPELS.
promisit; sed simul et Evangehura, et propheticum repellunt spi
ritum. Infelices vere, qui pseudoprophetae quidem esse volunt,
prophetiae vero gratiam repellunt ab ecclesia: sirailia patientes
his, qui propter eos qui in hypocrisi veniunt, etiam a fratrum
communicatione se abstinent.^ Datur autem intelhgi, quod hujus
modi neque apostolum Paulum recipiant. In ea enim Epistola,
quae est ad Corinthios, de propheticis charisraatibus diligenter
locutus est, et scit viros et mulieres in ecclesia prophetantes.
Per haec igitur omnia peccantes in Spiritum Dei, in irremissibile
incidunt peccatum. Hi Vero, qui sunt a Valentino, iterum ex-
sistentes extra omnem timorem, suas conscriptiones proferentes,
plura habere gloriantur, quara sint ipsa Evangelia. Siquidera in
tantum processerunt audaciae, uti quod ab his non ohm con-
scriptum est, Veritatis Evangelium titulent, in nihilo conveniens
apostolorum evangeliis, ut nec evangelium quidem sit apud eos
sine blaspheraia. Si enim, quod ab eis profertur, Veritatis est
Evangelium, dissimile est autem hoc illis, quae ab apostolis no
bis tradita sunt; qui volunt, possunt discere, quemadmodum ex
ipsis scripturis ostenditur, jam non esse id quod ab apostolis
traditum est Veritatis Evangelium. Quoniam autera sola ilia vera
et firma, et non capit neque plura, praeterquam praedicta sunt,
neque pauciora esse Evangelia, per tot et tanta ostendiraus. Et
enim cum omnia coraposita et apta Deus fecerit, oportebat et
speciera Evangelii bene corapositara, et bene compaginatam esse.
Examinata igitur sententia eorum qui nobis tradiderunt evange
lium, ex ipsis principiis ipsorum, veniamus et ad reliquos apo
stolos, et perquiraraus sententiam eorura de Deo: post deinde,
ipsos Domini sermones audiamus.

0 The well-known tenet of the Montanists forbidding the restoration of the
lapsed to Christian privileges is probably here alluded to. The reference in the
first part of the sentence is obscure. Those "infelices" appear to be the sect of
whom he speaks immediately before ; but it is not easy to find from other sources
any sect to which the description fuUy applies. On the whole, we may suppose
that ho compares the Alogi (or some such sect) in their rejection of prophecy
with the Montanists in their seclusion of themselves from their fellow-Christians.
The whole passage is difficult, as it runs in the old Latin.

the peesbytees. 71
7. The Presbyters,^
WHOSE TESTIMONY IKENAETTS EEPOKTS UPON.
Iren. IV. 32. 1. Hujusmodi quoque de duobus Testamentis senior
apostolorum discipulus disputabat, ab uno quidera et eodem Deo
utraque ostendens. Nec enim esse alterura Deura praeter eura qui
fecit ct plasmavit nos, nec firmitatem habere sermonem eorum qui
dicunt aut per angelos aut per aliam quamlibet virtutem aut ab
aho Deo factura esse hunc mundum qui est secundum nos. . .
Si autem credat quis unum Deum, et qui verbo omnia fecit
queraadraodum et Moses ait: Bixit Beus fiat lux et facta est lux
(Gen. i. 3); et in Evangelio legimus: Omnia per ipsum facta sunt,
et sine ipso factum est nihil, &c.
B. II. 22. 5. ^Quia autera XXX anuorura aetas prima indohs
est juvenis, et extenditur usque ad XL annorum, omnibus quilibet
confitebitur ; a XL autem et L anno declinat jam iu aetatem se
niorem, quam habens Dominus noster docebat, sicut evangeliura
'/at navTsg ol nqsa^-VTsqoL fiaqTvqovaiv, ol '/ard Tfjv udaiav Iw-
dvvjj Tcp TOV Kvqiov fiadrjTjj avfi^s^XrjxoTsg, naqa8s8co/evai Tama
Tdv Iwdvvrjv. ITaqifiELVs ydq amolg fisxqt zwv Tqaiavov '/qoviov.
Quidara autera eorum non solum Joannem sed et alios apostolos
viderunt, et haec eadera ab ipsis audierunt, et testantur de hu
jusmodi relatione. Quibus majus oportet credi? Dtrumne his
talibus, an Ptolemaeo, qui apostolos nunquara vidit, vestigium
autem apostoli ne in somniis quidem assecutus est?
' Eus. H. E. V. 8 says of Irenaeus: Kal 'ATto|jivir|fiOVEU,udTUV ["Ytcoijivt)-
(laTUv] 8e aTCOOToXtxoC Ttvc; TcpEopuTE'pou, ou Touvo[Jia (JtuTfij 7tap£8uxE (jivt)(jlo-
v£UEf c^TjYinaEic TE auTOu SJeiuv Ypacpuv TCapaTiitErat. Eusebius had not a clue
to the name of this Presbyter (he seems to have thought there was but one, or
is it but one whose writings were accessible ?) ; and modern conjecture is vain.
It can scarcely have been Polycarp or Papias. Sometimes Irenaeus calls his
authority d xp£(aao)V rJniSv (I. Pref 2, I. 13. 3 &c.), superior (III. 17. 4). Sometimes
he defines him. Thus, Quemadmodum audivi a quodam Prtsbytero, qui audierat
ab his qui apostolos viderant et ab iis qui didicerant (IV. 27. 1 &c.). Again he
quotes from senior apostolorum diseipulus (IV. 32. 1). In our second extract (II.
22. 5) he connects his authorities with John. Elsewhere he calls his authority o'
Seio; TcpEopuTT); xai xiipu? Tif]; aXiriSEfa; and d S£ocptXii)i; KpEopuTi)?.
' Irenaeus is opposing the idea that our Lord's ministry lasted only for one
year. He argues that when our Lord was baptized He was not of full age to be
a teacher, as Luke iii. 23 does not say He had completed 30 years. He seems to
found upon John viii. 57. The Greek is from Eus. H. E. HI. 23.

72 THE GOSPELS.
B. V. 36. 1, 2. ^'iig ol nqea^vTeqoi Xiyovai, tovs '/at ol ftiv
'/aTa^iwdivTeg Trjg iv ovqavcp 8iaTqi^fjg, h/elae xw^^ffot'trtv, ol 8e
Trjg TOV naqa8eiGov Tqvcpfjg dnoXavGovaiv, ot 8i [tijv ayiav yfjv '/af]
TfjV kafinqoTijTa T^g noXewg xadi^ovaiv [avv naat Tolg neqt amfjv
dyadolg, intxoqrjyovfiivoig vnd tov Qson] navTaxov ydq 6 2wTfjq
bqadrjasTai, '/adcog d^iot s'aovTat ol bqwvTsg avzov. Eivat 8i zfjv
8iaaToXfjV Tamrjv Tfjg olx'fjaswg twv tu s'/aTdv xaqnocpoqo'vvzwv
(Mat. xiii. 8), '/at ziiv Td e^rj/ovTa xat twv Td Tqid'/ovTW cbv
ol fiiv elg TO'vg ovqavovg dvaXrjcpdrjaovTat, ol 8e sv tc^ naqa8Eiati)
SiaTqiipovaiv, ol 8i Tfjv noXiv '/aTOi'/'^aovaiv, Kat 8id tovto sl-
qrj/ivai Tdv Kvqiov, iv Tolg tov naTqog fiov fiovdg sivat noXXdg
(John xiv. 2)* Ta ndvza ydq tov QscHj, og Tolg ndat Tfjv aqjio-
tovaav oXxrfiiv naqixst. Quemadraodura verbura ejus ait, omni
bus divisura esse a Patre secundum quod quis est dignus aut
erit. Et hoc est triclinium in quo recumbent ii qui epulantur
vocati ad nuptias. Hanc esse adordinationem et dispositionem
eorum qui salvantur, dicunt presbyteri apostolorum discipuli, et
per hujusmodi gradus perficere, et per Spiritum quidem ad Fihura,
per Filium autem ascendere ad Patrem; Filio deinceps cedente
Patri opus suum, quemadraodura et ab apostolo dictura est (1 Cor.
XV. 25) : Quoniam oportet regnare eum quoadusque ponat omnes
inimicos sub pedibus ejus. Noinssima inimica destruetur mors.
In teraporibus enira regni Justus homo super terram exsistens, ob-
liviscetur mori jam (1 Cor. xv. 27). Quando autem dixerit, in-
quit: omnia subjecta sunt scilicet absque eo qui subjecit omnia.
Quum autem ei fuerint subdita omnia tunc ipse Filius subjectus
erit ei qui sibi subjecit omnia, ut sit Beus omnia in omnibus.
8. Tatian. 1
Eus. H. E. IV. 29. '0 jisvzot ye nqmeqog amwv dqxrjydg b
TaTtavdg avvdcpeidv Tiva '/at awaywyfjv ovx otS' onwg tcov ev-
8 From Iren V. 36. 1 &c.; the Greek from Anastasius, Quaest. 74 in Script.
Sac. The words in brackets are not found in the Latin of Irenaeus.
' Tatiaii, a native of Assyria, a rhetorician by profession, disgusted with
heathenism, was converted to Christianity. He is said to have been a hearer
of Justin (Iren. I. 28. 1 quoted by Eus. H. E. IV. 29). He appears to have
published some heretical notions soon after A.D. 170. He held peculiar views
about aeons; declared marriage to be corruption; and denied that Adam could
be saved. Ho objected to the 0. T., probably because of its recognizing poly-

TATIAN. THEOPHILUS. 73
ayysXiwv awdstg to 8Ld Teaadqwv tovto nqoawvofiaaev o '/at
naqd Tiaiv elasTt vvv cpiqeTai. Tov 8' dnoOToXov cpaat ToXfifjaai
Tivag ai/'Tov fieTacpqdaat tpcovdg, c5g ini8ioqdo'Vfievov amwv Tfjv
Trjg cpqdaewg avvTa^iv.
Theodoret,^ Haer. Fab. I. 20. OiTog '/at 8 id Tsaadqwv /a-
Xovfievov awzidsi'/Ev Td svayysXiov, Tag te yeveaXoyiag neqi'/oxpag,
'/at Td a^Aa baa ix aniqfiaTog ^afit8 '/uTd adqxa yeyevrjfiivov Tdv
K'vqiov 8ei'/vvaiv. 'Exqiqaavzo 8i tovtcij ov fiovov ol Tfjg ixeivov
avfifioqiag, aXXd '/at ol Tolg anoOToXi'/oig snofisvot 86yfiaai, ttjv
Tfjg avvdff/rjg '/a'/ovqyiav ovx iyvwxoTsg, dXX' dnXo-vaTsqov dig
avvTOfiCj) TCj) ^i^X'tCj) x^jjffaftevot. Evqov 8i xdyco nXsiovg rj 8ia-
'/oaiag ^i^Xovg TOiamag iv Talg naq' fjfiiv i'/'/Xrjaiatg TSTifirjfii-
vag, xat ndaag awayaywv dnsdsftrjv xai tu nov Tszrdqwv svay-
ysXiOTWv dvTSia'fjyayov evayyiXia.
9. Theophilus.^
Ad Autol. III. pp. 124, 125. "Etl fifjv xat neqt 8ixaioavvrjg,
fjg 6 vofiog sl'qrjxev, d'/oXovda evqiaxeTai xat Td tiov nqocprjzcov
gamy. His view of the O. T. made him like a Gnostic ; but he seems to have
been a follower of no School. His only extant work is his Oration to the Greeks,
written in the reign of Marcus Aurelius (quoted below, see ' Gospel of John '). His
most famous work Aid TEaadpuv is lost. It is to it Eusebius refers in the text.
Eusebius also quotes as a report (Xc'yo; £'x£0 that Tatian was the founder (a'p-
y^TjYo'v) of the Eneratites, who denounced marriage; but his quotation from Ire
naeus only bears that the sect of the Eneratites derived from Tatian their recently
adopted opinion that Adam was beyond salvation. Eusebius did not know what
kind of thing the Atd TEaadpuv was. It seems to have been a Harmony or blend
ing of the four Gospels. Theodoret's account (in next extract) is probable enough ;
and the omission of the genealogies might be part of the work which Tatian thought
it necessary to do in order to compile a concise and consistent narrative from the
four Gospels. Epiphanius says, "The Gospel by the four (to 6id TEoaapuv) is
said to have been made by him, which some call the Gospel according to the
Hebrews." Victor of Capua (sixtli century) says it was called Dia Pente, but this
assertion has uo weight. Some think that he meant 8td TtdvTUv, others that he
mistook the book. (See Donaldson, Christian Literature, II. 26, and the whole of
his exhaustive discussion.) See below, under Matthew's Gospel, a disputed pas
sage. * Theodoret was Bishop of Cyrus in Syria from about A.D. 420, and died
A.D. 457. He was a voluminous author, writing a History of the Church, Com
mentaries on Scripture, &c. His objection to 'I'atian's book is founded on the
absence of the genealogies ; and he seems to have known no other fault, — rd
aXXa o'oa being vague enough to mean anything or nothing.
1 Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch about A.D. 180-193; the sixth from the
Apostles, says Eusebius (H. E. IV. 20, 24). He is said to have written a Har
mony. His chief work— to Autolycus — in three Books, survives. Eusebius calls

74 THE GOSPELS.
xat TWV e-vayyeXiaTwv s'xetv, 8id Td Tovg ndvTag nvsvfiaTo-
cpoqovg svt nvevjiaTt Qeov XeXaXrjxivai.
Hieron. prooem. in Mat. T. IV. p. 3. Primum enim difficile
est omnes legere qui in Evangelia scripserunt. Deinde multo dif-
ficilius, adhibito judicio, quae optima sunt, excerpere. Legisse
me fateor ante annos plurimos in Matthaeum Origenis viginti-
quinque volumina, et totidem ejus homilias, coramaticumque in
terpretationis genus: et Theophili Antiochenae urbis Episcopi
Commentarios. . . .
Hieron. epist. ad Algas. T. IV. p. 197. Theophilus, Antioche
nae ecclesiae septimus post Petrum apostolum episcopus, qui qua
tuor evangelista/rum in unum opus dicta compingens, ingenii sui
nobis moniraenta reliquit, haec super hac parabola in suis com-
mentariis locutus est.
Hieron. de ill. vir. c. 25. Legi sub ejus nomine in Evan
gelium et in Proverbia Salomonis Commentarios, qui mihi cum
superiorum voluminum elegantia et phrasi non videntur congruere.
10. Clement of Alexandria.
(See before, p. 67, and notes.)
Eus. H. E. VI. 14. 'Ev 8s Talg vnoTvntiaeat ^weXovTu ei
nelv ndarjg Trjg ev8iad-fj/ov yqacfffjg iniTeTfirjfiivag nenoirjzai 8irj-
yrjOetg,^ jirjSs Tag avziXsyofisvag naqeXdcfrv,^ Trpi 'lo'v8a Xsyw xat
Tag Xoindg '/adoXr/dg imaToXdg, T'fjv tc Baqvd^a xat ttjv He-
Tqov Xsyofis'vrjv ano'/dXvxptv. Kat Tfjv nqdg 'E^qaiovg 8i intazo-
it elementary (aT0iX£iu'8i()). It is a discourse composed at different times in three
parts tq show the superiority of Christianity to heathenism. He founds largely
upon the O. T. He is the first to quote the Gospel of John by name (see
below, John's Gospel), but he refers to several books of the N. T., and ex
plicitly quotes 1 Timothy (see below). He wrote a book against Marcion which
is lost. Some ' Commentaries on the Gospels ' in Latin hearing his name are
extant, but are not allowed by scholars to be his. Eusebius says that in writing
against the heresy of Hermogenes he used testimonies from the Apocalypse. He
cites Paul's Epistle as Seio; Xo'yo;. The passfige in our text puts the New Testa
ment and the Old on the same level; and the same word T:vEU|ji.aTo'q)opoi is used
in the citation from John, so that al d-ilai Ypacpaf probably includes John in that
case. The way in which he quotes Matthew and John, his work against Mar
cion, and his Commentaries or his Harmony, may serve to show the acceptance
of the Gospels in his time.
' StTlYifioEt; : variously translated "explications,'' "accounts,'' "narratives."
' avTtXEYcV£MO" -^pat^al: see before, page 10, for explanation of Eusebius's
meaning.

CLEMENT OP ALEXANDRIA. TERTULLIAN. 75
Xrjv. [For the rest of this reference see under 'Hebrews.'] .Av-
dtg 8 iv Tolg avTolg b KX-fjfirjg ^i^Xioig nsqt Tfjg Td^ewg Tt3v
evayyeXiwv naqd8oaiv tc5v dvsxadev nqsa^msqiov TsdEiTai,
TOVTOV syovaav Tdv zqdnov. Ilqoysyqdcpdat sXeyov tc5v EvayysXicov
Td nsqiixovTa rag ysvsaXoyiag. Td de '/aTa Mdq'/ov,^ za-vzrjv
iaxrj/ivat Tfjv olxovofiiav. Tov IIsTqov 8rjfioaia iv "^Pcofijj xrjqv-
^avTog TOV Xoyov, '/at nvsvfiaTt Td EvayyiXiov i^sinovzog, Tovg
naqorcag noXXovg ovTag naqaxaXiaai Tdv Mdq'/ov, cog av dxo-
Xovd'TjOavTa avTi^i no^qiodsv '/at fiSfivrjfisvov tcjjv XexdivTiov, ava-
yqdipat tu elqijfiiva' noffjaavza 8i Td e'vayyiXiov, fieTa8oiJvat Tolg
8eofiivoig avTOv. "Oneq intyvovTa tov Ilszqov, nqoTqenTixwg fiijTe
•/wXvaaL firjce nqoTqiipaadai, tov fiivzoi 'icodvvrjv saxazov avvi-
86vTa, OTt Ta acojiaTi'/d iv Tolg svayysXioig 8E8rjXwzai, nqozqa-
nsvza vnd tcov yvwqifiwv, nvsvfiaTt dsocpoqrjdivza, nvevjiazt'/dv
noifjaat evayysXiov. Toaama b KX'fjfirjg.
Clem. Alex. Strom. III. 553. z/ta tovto' toi b Kaaatavdg cprjot,
nvvdavofiivTjg Tijg 2aXcofiTjg noTS yvwadfjoezai tu neqt wv rjqeTo,
Eiprj b Kvqiog, orav Td Trjg alaxvvrjg EvSvfia naT'fjarjcs, '/at mav yi-
VTjTai Ta 8vo sv, xat Td d^qev fisTa Tfjg d-rjXeiag ome d^^ev, oms
dfjXv. Ilqdizov fiiv ovv iv Tolg naqa8e8ofiivoig fjfiiv TiTaqaiv
evayyeXiotg ov'/ e'xofiev to qrjzdv, dXX' iv tc^ xut .AlyvnTtovg.^
11. Tertullian.
(See Adv. Marcion. IV. 1, before p. 49.)
Adv. Marcion. IV. 2. Habes nunc ad Antitheses expeditam
a nobis responsionera. Transeo nunc ad Evangelii, sane non Ju-
daici, sed Pontici,^ interim adulterati demonstrationera, prae-
s Compare what is said by Irenaeus (p. 67). The discrepancy may be removed
by supposing that Peter did not know at first of the request made to Mark, that
he neither approved nor disapproved of the writing of the Gospel, but that when
it was written he was pleased with it, and sanctioned (tacitly or expressly) its cir
culation. But is it necessary to explain a discrepancy like this which marks the
variations of a tradition?
* The way in which Clement here quotes the Gospel of the Egyptians is
significant To say (as the author of 'Supernatural Religion' says, I. 422) that
"Clement of Alexandria quotes the Gospei of the Hebrews as an authority with
quite the same respect as the other Gospels " is incorrect, as may be seen from
the distinct place assigned by Clement to the four canonical Gospels in the text.
(See below, ' Gospel of Hebrews. ')
' Marcion was a native of Sinope (Pontus), hence the phrase 'Pontic Gospel.'
He was in communion with the Church of Rome in the time of Eleutherus (according

76 THE GOSPELS.
structuram ordinem quem aggredimur. Constituiraus in primis,
evangehcum Instrumentum apostolos auctores habere, quibus hoc
munus evangelii promulgandi ab ipso Domino sit irapositum; si
et apostolicos, non tamen solos, sed cura apostolis, et post apo
stolos. Quoniam praedicatio discipulorum suspecta fieri posset
de gloriae studio, si non adsistat illi auctoritas magistrorura, iramo
Christi, quae magistros apostolos fecit. Denique, nobis fidem ex
apostolis Joannes et Matthaeus insinuant; ex apostolicis, Lucas
et Marcus instaurant, iisdem regulis exorsi, quantum ad unicura
Deura attinet Creatorera, et Christura ejus, natura ex Virgine,
supplementum Legis et Prophetarura. Viderit enira si narratio-
num dispositio variavit, duramodo de capite fidei conveniat, de
quo cum Marcione non convenit. Contra' Marcion, Evangelio, sci
licet suo, nullum adscribit auctorem, quasi non licuerit illi titu-
lura quoque affingere, cui nefas non fuit ipsura corpus evertere.
Et possera hic jara gradum figere, non agnoscendura contendens
opus, quod non erigat frontera, quod nullara constantiara prae-
ferat, nullam fidem repromittat de plenitudine tituli, et profes-
sione debita auctoris. Sed per omnia congredi malumus, nec dis-
simulamus quod ex nostro intellegi potest. Nam ex iis commen-
tatoribus quos haberaus, Lucam videtur Marcion elegisse, quem
caederet.2 Porro Lucas non apostolus, sed apostolicus: non ma

te Tertullian), and is said to have been expelled from the Church because of his
crimes. His activity in Rome began about A.D. 135-142, probably about A.D. 141.
Justin (A.D. 139-148 (?), see Introduction) writes of him as well-known, and fol
lowed by many in every nation. His main idea was the usual Gnostic one of
antagonism between the Old and New Testaments; and he held that the Jewish
God was not He whom Jesus preached. He published a Canon : one Gospel, ' The
Gospel of the Lord' = a mutilated Luke, and 10 Epp. of Paul called dTcd<JToXo?.
His Epp. were Gal., Cor. (2), Rom., Thess. (2), Eph., Coloss., Philem., Philipp.,
and some passages from that "to the Laodiceans." His ver.sion of the Gospel of
Luke is published by Hahn (Thilo, Cod. Apoc). Rejecting the opening chapters,
he began with the Lord's appearance in the synagogue of Capernaum. The life
and death of Jesus are retained with such changes as he thought necessary, — e.g.,
in Luke xxiv. 25 he omits the reference to the prophets. His great work was
called Antitheses — i.e., Antagonism between the Old Testament and the New.
2 It is now generally agreed by almost all critics of every school that Marcion
had Luke's Gospel before him and mutilated it. The argument in ' Supernatural
Religion ' in favour of Marcion's originality is well answered by Sanday, ' Gospels
in the Second Century. ' The Fathers are unanimous in stating that Marcion altered
Luke; Epiphanius and Tertullian quote largely from Marcion's Gospel, and their
quotations correspond. The difference between our Gospel and Marcion's is mainly
that the latter omits passages, although in some cases he preserves a different
reading from that in the ordinary text. The testimony of Irenaeus is clear, and

TERTULLIAN. 77
gister, sed discipulus; utique magistro minor; certe tanto poste
rior, quanto posterioris apostoli sectator, Pauli sine dubio: ut,
etsi sub ipsius Pauli nomine Evangelium Marcion intulisset, non
sufficeret ad fidem singularitas Instrumenti, destituta patrocinio
antecessorum; exigeretur enim id quoque Evangelium quod Pau
lus invenit, cui fid era dedidit, cui mox suum congruere gestiit. Si
quidem (Gal. ii. 1) propterea Hierosolymam ascendit ad cogno-
scendos apostolos, et consultandos, ne forte in vacuum cucur-
risset, i.e., ne non secundum illos credidisset, et non secundum
illos evangelizaret. Denique, ut cura auctoribus contulit et con
venit de regula fidei, dexteras miscuere, et exinde officia prae-
dicandi distinxerunt, ut illi in Judaeos, Paulus in Judaeos et in
nationes. Igitur si ipse illuminator Lucae, auctoritatem anteces-
sorura et fidei et praedicationi suae optavit, quanto magis eam
Evangelio Lucae expostulem, quae evangelio magistri ejus fuit
necessaria? Aliud est, si penes Marcionem a discipulatu Lucae
coepit religionis Christianae sacramentum. Caeterum, si et retro
decucurrit, habuit utique authenticara paraturara, per quam ad
Lucara usque pervenit, cujus testiraonio assistente, I-ucas quoque
possit admitti.
C. 3. Sed enim Marcion nactus epistolara PauU ad Gala
tas, etiara ipsos apostolos suggillantis (Gal. ii), ut non recto
pede incedentes ad veritatera evangelii, simul et accusantis pseud-
apostolos quosdam pervertentes evangehura Christi, connititur ad
destruendura statum eorura Evangeliorum, quae propria et sub
apostolorum nomine eduntur, vel etiara apostolicorum; ut sci
licet fidera, quara illis adimit, suo conferat. Porro, etsi repre-
hensus est Petrus et Joannes et Jacobus, qui existimabantur co-
lumnae, manifesta causa est.^ Personarum enim respectu vide-
bantur variare convictura. Et taraen, cura ipse Paulus omni
bus omnia fieret, ut omnes lucraretur (1 Cor. ix. 19), potuit et
made repeatedly, and testifies to the fact of the mutilation of St. Paul's Epistles
and of St. Luke's Gospel (see before in the quotations from Iren. I. 27. 2, &c.,
and afterwards under 'Marcion'). Justin, writing about A.D. 147, says that
Marcion's doctrines were widespread. The difference in N. T. readings between
Marcion's copy of Luke and that known to Tertullian throws the Gospel back to
a considerably anterior date ; as the readings show that Marcion's copy was the
result of repeated transcription.
* Marcion was a resolute enemy of Judaism, and he therefore rested on Ga
latians, although he cut out even from it the references to Abraham in t. iii.

78 THE GOSPELS.
Petro hoc in consiho fuisse, aliquid aliter agendi, quam docebat.
Proinde si et pseudapostoli irrepserant, horum quoque quali tas
edita est, circumcisionera vindicantiura et Judaicos fastos. Ideo
non de praedicatione, sed de conversatione, a Paulo denotaban-
tur; aequo denotaturo, si quid de Deo creatore, aut Christo ejus
errassent. Igitur distinguenda erunt singula. Si apostolos prae-
varicationis et siraulationis suspectos Marcion haberi queritur us
que ad Evangelii* depravationera, Christum jam accusat, accu-
sando quos Christus elegit. Si vero apostoh quidera integrura
evangeliura contulerunt, de sola convictus inaequalitate reprehensi,
pseudapostoli autem veritatera eorura interpolaverunt, et inde sunt
nostra Digesta ; quod erit gerraanura illud apostolorura Instruraen-
tura, quod adulteros passura est? Quod Paulum illuminavit, et
ab eo Lucam? Aut si tara funditus deletura est, ut cataclysmo
quodam, ita inundatione falsariorum obliteratura; jara ergo nec
Marcion habet verum. Aut si ipsura erit verura, id est aposto
lorura, quod Marcion habet solus; et quomodo nostro consonat,
quod non apostolorum, sed Lucae refertur? Aut si non statim
Lucae deputandura est, quo Marcion utitur ; quia nostro consonat,
scilicet adulterate etiam circa titulum; caeterura apostolorura est;
jara ergo et nostrura quod illi consonat, aequo apostolorum est,
sed adulteratum de titulo quoque.
C. 4. Funis ergo ducendus est contentionis, pari hinc inde
nisu fluctuante. Ego meum dico verum, Marcion suum. Ego
Marcionis affirmo adulteratum, Marcion raeura. Quis inter nos
determinabit, nisi temporis ratio, ei praescribens auctoritatem, quod
antiquius reperietur; et ei praejudicans vitiationem, quod poste-
rius revincetur? In quantura enira falsura corruptio est veri, in
tantum praecedat necesse est Veritas falsura. Prior erit res pas
sione, et raateria aemulatione. Ahoquin, quam absurdum ut si
nostrura antiquius probaverimus, Marcionis vero posterius; et no
strum ante videatur falsura quam habuerit de veritate materiam,
et Marcionis ante credatur aeraulationera a nostro expertum quam
et editum, et postrerao id verius existimetur, quod est serins
post tot ac tanta jara opera atque documenta Christianae reli
gionis seculo edita, quae edi utique non potuissent sine Evangelii
* Evangelium here is not used as by St. Paul for the substance of the Gos
pel, but denotes the written Gospel, as is clear from what follows.

TERTULLIAN. 79
veritate, id est ante Evangelii veritatem. Quod ergo pertinet
ad Evangelium interim Lucae, quatenus coramunio ejus inter nos
et Marcionem de veritate disceptat, adeo antiquius Marcione est,
quod est secundura nos, ut et ipse illi Marcion ahquando credi-
derit; quum et pecuniam in prirao calore fidei catholicae eccle
siae contulit, projectara mox cum ipso postea quam in haeresim
suam a nostra veritate descivit. Quid nunc si negaverint Mar-
cionitae, primam apud nos fidem ejus, adversus epistolam quo
que ipsius? Quid si nec epistolam agnoverint? Certe Antitheses
non modo fatentur Marcionis, sed et praeferunt. Ex his mihi
probatio sufficit. Si enim id Evangeliura quod Lucae refertur
penes nos (viderimus an et penes Marcionem) ipsum est quod
Marcion per Antitheses suas arguit, ut interpolatum a protecto-
ribus Judaismi ad concorporationem Legis et Prophetarura, qua
etiara Christum inde confingerent, utique non potuisset arguere,
nisi quod invenerat. Nemo post futura reprehendit, quae ignorat
futura> emendatio culpam non antecedit. Eraendator sane evan-
gehi a Tiberianis usque ad Antoniniana tempora eversi, Marcion
solus et priraus ob venit, expectatus tamdiu a Christo, poeni-
tente jara quod apostolos praeraisisse properasset sine praesidio
Marcionis; nisi quod huraanae temeritatis, non divinae auctori
tatis negotiura est haeresis, quae sic" semper emendat Evangelia,
dum vitiat: quum etsi discipulus Marcion, non tamen super ma
gistrum (Mat. X. 24). Et si apostolus Marcion, Sive ego, inquit
Paulus (1 Cor. xv. 11), sive illi, sic praedicamus. Et si prophetes
Marcion : et spiritus prophetarum prophetis erunt subditi (1 Cor.
xiv. 32). Non enim eversionis sunt, sed pacis. Etiam si angelus
Marcion, citius (Gal. i. 8) anathema dicendus quam evangelizator,
quia aliter evangehzavit. Itaque dum emendat, utruraque con-
firraat, et nostrum anterius, id emendans quod invenit, et id
posterius, quod de nostri emendatione constituens, suum et no
vum fecit.
C. 5. In summa, si constat id verius quod prius, id prius
quod et ab initio, id ab initio, quod ab apostolis, pariter uti
que constabit; id esse ab apostolis traditum, quod apud eccle
sias apostolorum fuerit sacrosanctum. Videamus quod lac a
Paulo Corinthii hauserint, ad quam regulam Galatae sint recor-
recti, quid legant Philippenses, Thessalonicenses, Ephesii; quid

80 THE GOSPELS.
etiam Romani de proximo sonent, quibus evangelium et Petrus
et Paulus sanguine quoque suo signatura reliquerunt. Haberaus
et Joannis alumnas ecclesias. Nara etsi Apocalypsin ejus Mar
cion respuit, ordo taraen episcoporum ad originem recensus, in
Joannem stabit auctorem. Sic et caeterarum generositas recogno-
scitur. Dico itaque apud illas, nec solas jam apostolicas, sed
apud universas, quae illis de societate sacra raenti confoederantur,
id Evangehura Lucae ab initio editionis suae stare, quod cum
maxime tuemur : Marcionis vero, plerisque nec notura ; nuUis au
tem notum, ut non eadem damnatum. Habet plane et illud eccle
sias, sed suas, tara posteras quara adulteras, quarura si censura
requiras, facilius apostaticura invenias quam apostolicum; Mar
cione scilicet conditore, vel aliquo de Marcionis examine. Fa-
ciunt favos et vespae; faciunt ecclesias et Marcionitae. Eadem
auctoritas ecclesiarum apostolicarum caeteris quoque patrocina-
bitur Evangeliis, quae proinde per illas, et secundura illas habe
raus, Joannis dico et Matthaei, licet et Marcus quod edidit, Petri
affirmetur, cujus interpres Marcus. Nam et Lucae Digestum Paulo
adscribere solent. Capit magistrorum videri, quae discipuli pro-
raulgarint. Itaque et de his Marcion flagitandus, quod oraissis
eis, Lucae potius institerit, quasi non et haec apud ecclesias a
priraordio fuerint, quemadmodum et Lucae. Atquin haec magis a
primordio fuisse credibile est, ut priora, qua apostolica, ut cum
ipsis ecclesiis dedicata. Caeterum, quale est, si nihil apostoli
ediderunt, ut discipuli potius ediderint, qui nec discipuli existere
potuissent sine ulla doctrina raagistrorura? Igitur dum constet
haec quoque apud ecclesias fuisse, cur non haec quoque Marcion
attigit, aut emendanda si adulterata, aut agnoscenda si integra?
Nam et competit, ut si qui Evangelium pervertebant eorura ma
gis curarent perversiouem, quorura sciebant auctoritatem receptio-
rem. Ideo et pseudapostoli, quod per falsura apostolos imitaren-
tur. In quantum ergo emendasset quae fuissent emendanda, si
fuissent corrupta, in tantum confirraavit non fuisse corrupta, quae
non putavit eraendanda. Denique eraendavit, quod corruptura
existiraavit. Sed nec hoc merito, quia non fuit corruptura. Si
enira apostolica integre decucurrerunt, Lucae autera, quod est
secundura nos, adeo congruit regulae eorum, ut cum illis apud
ecclesias maneat, jam et Lucae constat integrum decucurrisse

TERTULLIAN. ORIGEN. 81
usque ad sacrilegium Marcionis. Denique, ubi manus illi Mar
cion intulit, tunc diversum et acmulum factura est apostolicis.
Igitur dabo consiliura discipulis ejus, ut aut ilia couvertant, li
cet sero, ad forraam sui, quo cum apostolicis convenire videan-
tur (nam et quotidie reformant illud, prout a nobis quotidie re-
viucuntur), aut erubescant de magistro utrobique traducto, cum
Evangelii veritatem nunc ex conscientia tramittit ; nunc ex irapu-
dentia evertit. His fere compendiis utiraur, quum de Evangelii
fide adversus haereticos expedimur, defendentibus et temporum
ordinem posteritati falsariorum praescribentem, et auctoritatera
ecclesiarum traditioni apostolorum patrocinantera, quia Veritas
falsura praecedat necesse est, et ab eis procedat, a quibus tra
dita est.
C. 6. Sed alium jam hinc inimus gradum, ipsura (ut professi
sumus) Evangehura Marcionis provocantes, sic quoque probaturi
adulteratum. Certe enira totum, quod elaboravit, etiara Antithe
ses praestruendo, in hoc cogit, ut Veteris et Novi Testamenti
diversitatem consti tuat; proinde Christum suum a creatore sepa
ratum, ut Dei alterius, ut alienura Legis et Prophetarura.
12. ORIGE^.
Contra Celsum, Tom. III. p. 473 (Migne, vol. I. p. 969). Hi-
azevofiev 8i '/at zalg nqoatqiasat zwv yqaipdvzwv zd EvayysXia,
'/aTaaTOxatofiEvot TTjg svXa^siag avTwv '/at tov avvEi86Tog, ificpai-
vofiivwv Tolg yqdfiftaaiv, ov8iv vodov xat '/v§Evzi'/dv, xat nsnXa-
Ofiivov xat navovqyov ixovzwv.
Homil. in Luc. Tom. III. p. 932 Sicut olira in populo Judaeo-
sq.) (Migne, vol. in. p. 1801.)^ rum multi prophetiara poUice-
'EnEi8fjnsq noXXot snExsi- bantur, et quidam erant pseudo-
qrjoav dvaTa^aadat nsqt prophetae e quibus unus fuit Ana-
Twv nenXrjqocpoqrjfiivwv. nias filius Agot; alii vero pro-
'Enei8fj vniqoy/ov rjv to int- phetae; et erat gratia in populo
xeiqrjfia avdqwnov ovTa Qeofj discernendorura spirituura, per
8i8aaxaXiav xat q-fjfiaTa avy- quem ahi inter prophetas recipie-
yqdcpsiv, sl'/oTwg dnoXoyelTat iv bantur, nonnuUi quasi ab exerci-
' After his return from Antioch, to which he had been called hy Mamniaea
-mother of Alexander Severus, he began his Commentaries on Scripture, 6

82 THE GOSPELS.
Tip nqooifiiii). "iianeq 8i ovv tatissimis trapezitis (Rom. ii. 16)
T^ naXatcJr Xaqi noXXot nqocprj- reprobabantur; ita et nunc in No-
zeiav inrjyyiXXovTo, dXXd tovtwv vo Testamento multi conati sunt
fiiv Ttveg ^ffav xpev8o7rqocpfjzat, scribere Evangelia, sed non omnes
Ttveg de dXrjdcJitg nqocpfjcai. Kat recepti. Et ut sciatis, non solum
ijV T^ Xa^r xoiQi-<^^i(* 8ia'/qiaswg quatuor Evangelia, sed pluriraa
nvEVfidTwv omw /at vvv iv tjj esse conscripta, e quibus haec,
Kaivfj //ladfjxj] Ta EvayysXia quae haberaus, electa sunt, et
noXXot idiXijaav yqdipai, dXX' ol tradita ecclesiis, ex ipso prooe-
86'/ifioL Tqans^iTai ^ ov ndvTa mio Lucae, quod ita contexitur,
dvixqivav, dXXd Ta Tsaaaqa fid- cognoscaraus: Quoniam quidem
vov snsXs^avTO. Tdxa ovv to multi conati sunt ordinare nar-
insxsiqrjGav, XsXrjdvlav s'xst rationem. Hoc quod ait, conati
'/aTTjyoqiav tc5v nqonsTcJUg x-at sunt, latentera habet accusatio-
Xcoqtg xoiqiGfiazog iXdovzwv int nem eorum qui absque gratia
T^v dvayqacpfjv twv EvayyeXiwv. Spiritus Sancti ad scribenda
MaTdalog ydq o-v'/ insxeiqrjasv, Evangelia prosilierunt. Mat-
dXX' syqaxfiev i^ dyiov '/ivovfisvog thaeus quippe, et Marcus, et Jo-
nvevfiaTog. 'Ofioiwg xat Mdq'/og annes, et Lucas non sunt conati
'/at'hodvvTjg' naqan?.rjaiwg8iKat scribere; sed Spiritu Sancto pleni
.Aovxdg. Td fiivTot intyeyqufi- scripserunt Evangelia. Multi igi-
fiivov xaT* AlyvnTiovg Evayyi- tur conati sunt ordinare narra-
Xiov '/at TO sniysyqafifisvov Tcbv tionera de his rebus quae mani-
JdSsxa E'vayyiXiov ol avyyqd- festissirae cognitae sunt in nobis.
xpavTsg snsxeiqrjaav. (DiqBTat Ecclesia quatuor habet Evange-
de Td '/aTa Qwfidv E'vayyiXiov. Iia, haereses plurima: e quibus
"H8rj de iuoXfirjaE '/at BaaiXi8rjg quoddara scribitur secundura Aeg-
yqdipai xaTd BaaiXi8Tjv Evayyi- yptios , aliud juxta Duodecim
Xlov. IloXXot fiiv ovv insxsi- Apostolos. Ausus fuit et Basihdes
qrjaav '/at '/aTa MaTdiav xat scribere Evangelium, et suo illud
dXXd nXsiova' Ta 8i TezTaqa nomine titulare. Multi conati
fiova nqoxqivst fj Qeov i/xXrj- sunt scribere ; sed et raulti conati
fft'a. Ovy dnXwg 8i neniOTev- sunt ordinare. Quatuor tantum
fiivwv, dXXd nenXrjqocpoqrjfiivwv Evangelia sunt probata, e qui-
t6 dnaqd§aTov Tolg Xsyofii- bus sub persona Domini et Sal-
2 The well-known saying yiveoSs TpaKESfrat 8o'xt|jioi (Clem. Alex. Strom. I.
354). It is sometimes ascribed to Jesus Christ (Origen), sometimes to Paul (Cyril
Alex.).

ORIGEN. 83
votg fiaqTvqdiv. ITqayfiaTwv vatori nostris proferenda sunt
de elnev, dvaiqwv Tfjv a'iqsaiv dogmata. Scio quoddam Evan-
Twv xaTa cpavTaaiav Xsyofiivwv gelium, quod appellatur secun-
Ta 8id TOV ^coTTjqog ysyevfjadai dura Thomam, et juxta Mat-
y.aTa T^v ffa^jtwfftv awori. Ilsqt thiam, et alia plura legimus, ne
de TWV nsnXijqocpoqri fiivwv quid ignorare videremur, propter
Elnwv TfjV 8iddsaiv amov ificpai- eos qui se putant aliquid scire,
ve/. IIsnXrjqocpdqrjTo ydq '/at oi'- si ista cognoverint. Sed in his
8iv s8iaTaCE noTsqov omwg syei omnibus nihil aliud probamus
t) (w. 'Oti 8i naqd zwv amoipst nisi quod ecclesia, id est qua-
dsaaafiivwv naqiXa^s, aacpwg tuor tan tura Evangelia recipi en-
wfioXdyrjOsv slncov ' Kad cog da,. Haec idcirco, quia in prin-
naqi8oGav fjfiiv ol dnaq- cipio lectum est: Multi conati
Xfjg avTonTai '/at vnrjqiTat sunt ordinare narrationem de his
yevofievoi tov Xoyov. Jia- rebus quae confirmatae sunt in
§e^aiovzai ydq mi dvwdev naq- nobis. Illi tentaverunt atque co-
rj/oXovdrjasv o'v Tiai tcov elqrj- nati sunt de his rebus scribere,
fiivwv dXXd ndaiv.^ quae in nobis manifestissime sunt
compertae. Effectum suum Lu
cas indicat ex sermone quo ait:
In nobis manifestissime sunt os-
tensae, id est nenXrjqocpoqrjfii-
vcov (quod uno verbo Latinus
sermo non exphcat).
Comment, in Joh. Tom. I. 4 sqq. (Migne, vol. IV. p. 25.) Kat
ydq ToXfirjziov slnslv naacLv TfSv yqacpcJov eivat dnaqxfjv to Evay
yiXiov. '.Anaqxfjv ovv nqd^ewv i^ ov tjj 'u4Xe^av8qeici ini8E8rjfiiq-
'/afisv^, riva dXXrjv, rj Tfjv sig tijv anaqyfjv twv yqacptav ixqfjv ye-
yovivai ; Xq^ de fjfidg el8ivat ov Tamdv eivat dnaqxfjv '/at nqw-
ToyivvTjfia. MsTa ydq TOvg ndvTag xaqnovg dvacpiqsTat fj dnaqxfj,
nqd 8s ndvTwv to nqorzoyivvrjfia.^ Twv Toivvv cpsqo fiivwv yqa-
s On the Apocryphal Gospels mentioned iu this extract, Origen's testimony is
interesting. On the Gospel of Basilides see Introduction ; on the Gospel of The
Twelve see Introduction ' Gospel of the Hebrews.' The Gospel according to the
Egyptians is not mentioned elsewhere by Origen.
* The Greek is from the ^^Schedae Grabii et Combefisii;" the Latin (Which
varies considerably) is from Jerome's translation.
5 Origen distinguishes between the offering of the "first-fruits of thy la
bours" at the feast of harvest (see Lev. ii. 14) and the further and more formal
6*

84 THE. GOSPELS.
ipdiv '/at iv ndaaig ix'/Xrjoiaig Qsov nsniaTsvfiivwv sivai dsiwv,
ov/ av dfidqTot Tig Xiywv nqwToysvvrjfia fiiv tov Miovaicog vofiov,
dnaqyfjv 8i to E'vayyiXiov fisTd ydq Tovg ndvzag twv nqocprjzdiv
'/aqnovg, tcov fisyqt tov Kvqiov Irjaov, 6 TsXstog ifiXdoTrjae Xoyog.
C. 5. 'Edv 8i Tig avdvnocpiqjj 8id Tfjv svvoiav Trjg avanTv^siog
TWV dnaqycJiv cpda'/wv fiSTd Ta EvayyiXta Tag Ilqd^Etg '/at Tag
'EniOToXdg cpiqsad-at twv dnooToXwv, xat '/aTd tovto fi-fj dv sti
aco^sadat Td nqoa7io8s8ofiivov nsqt anaqxfjg, Td anaqxfjv ndarjg
yqacprjg sivai to EvayysXiov Xe'/teov rjcoL vovv eivat aocpcov iv
XqiaTCj), chcpeXrjfiivcov sv Talg cpeqofiivaig 'EniaToXaig, 8eofiivwv
'iva niOTevwvTai fiaqTvqitHv twv ev ToTg vofw/olg '/at nqocprjzi'/olg
Xdyotg '/eifiivwv diaze aocpd fiiv /at ntOTd Xiyetv xat a(p68qa sni-
TSTayjiEva Td dnoaToXi'/d, o'v fifjv naqanX'fjata Tip' Td8B Xiyet
Kvqiog rcavTOxqdTwq' '/at '/aTa tovto sniazrjaov sl, indv Xi-
yst 6 IlavXog' Ildaa yqacp'fj d-eonvevOTog xat coipiXtfiog
ifineqtXafi^dvet xat Td savTov yqdfifiaTa, 'rj ov to' Kayio Xsyw,
'/at ovx b K'vqtog, '/at to' 'Ev ndaatg ix'/XrjO iaig 8taTda-
aofiat, xat to' Oia s'nadov iv .Avtioxslu, iv 'ixovici), ev
yivaTqotg '/at Td Towotg naqanXfjOia ivioTS vn' amofj yqacpivTa
'/at xaT i^ovaiav, o'v prfjv Td slXtxqtvig twv ex dsiag intnvoiag
Xoywv 7j xat tovto naqaoTaTiov oTt fj TlaXatd fiiv ovx EvayysXiov,
ov Sst'/vvovaa tov iqyofisvov, dXXd nqoayyiXXovaa '/at nqoxrjqva-
Govaa' ndaa 8e fj Kaivfj Td EvayyiXiov eotiv, ov fiovov bfioiwg
TJj dqxjj TOV EvayysXiov cpdaxovaa' '18 ov b dfivdg tov QsoiJ b
a'lqwv TTjV dfiaqTiav tov '/oafiov, dXXd xat noixiXag So^o-
Xoyiag nsqtsxovaa xat 8i8aa'/aXiag tov 8i' ov Td EvayyiXiov E'v
ayyiXiov effTtv. . . .
C. 6. Eyto 8i oifiai, otl '/at, Tsaadqcov 'ovtwv twv EvayyeXiwv,
olovet aTOLxeiwv Trjg nioTSwg Trjg i'/'/Xrjaiag, e| wv azotxsiwv b
nag avviaTTjxs xSajiog, iv XqiaTip xaTaXXaystg Tip ©ew, xadd
cprjaiv b IlavXog' Qsdg rjv iv XqiOTcp xoofiov '/aTaXXda-
awv savTCj), ov xoa fiov Tfjv dfiaqTiav rjqev 'Irjaovg' neqt ydq tov
'/oGfiov zrjg ixxXrjaiag b Xoyog effTiv 6 yeyqafifiivog' 'l8ov 6 dfivdg
offering at the feast of Pentecost. See Lev. xxiii. and Exod. xxiii. 16. The
former, B^'^'sa, TcpuTOYEvviQuaTa, he finds in the law of Moses ; the latter, niai-ir,
aTtapxiq, is the Gospel. Lardner translates literally "first-begotten" and "first-
fruits." See Num. xxviii. 26, &c. B"''il3a!n ar, day of first-fruits, is Pentecost. See
Oehler, O. T. Theology, vol. II § 155.

ORIGEN. 85
TOV Qeov b a'tqwv Tfjv dfiaqTiav tov xdafiov, dnaq'/jjv
Tc5v EvayysXicov slvai Td nqoaTSTayftivov fjfiiv vno aov '/aTd 8v-
vafiiv sqsvv^aai zd '/azd 'iwdvvrjV Tdv ysvsaXoyo'VfiEvov sinwv, xat
and TOV dyeveaXoyfjzov dqyofievov MaTdalog fiiv ydq, Tolg nqoa-
8o'/ioat TOV [to] i^ '^^qadfi '/at Ja^td 'E^qaioig yqdcpwv, Bi-
§Xog, cprjot, ysviaswg 'ItjOov Xqtazov vlov Ja^td, vlov
'^ ^qadfi' '/at Mdq'/og slScag o yqdcpet, dqxf/v 8irjyelTai tov Ev
ayyeXiov, rd'/a evqiO'/ovzwv fjficov to TiXog amov naqd Tip 'icodvvjj
iv aqxjj vioyov Qedv yloyov. 'AXXd xat .Aov/dg eiqrj/iog iv aqyfj
TWV Ilqd^swv Tdv fiiv nqwTov Xoyov inoiijadfiTjv nsqt
ndvTwv wv i^q^aTO b 'irjaovg noislv '/at 8i8da'/eLV, aXXd
ye TTjqel t^ int Td arrjdog dvansGovzi zov Iqaov zovg fisitovag
'/at TsXstOTsqovg nsqt 'irjaov XSyovg. Oiidstg ydq i'/sivwv d'/qazcHg
icpaviqcoasv a-mov ttjv dsoTrjTa, wg Icodvvrjg naqaarrfiag avrdv
XiyovTa' 'Eyio slfii Td qowg tov '/da fiov iyco slfit fj b8dg,
'/at fj dXrjd-sta, '/at fj twij' iyco slfit fj dvdoTaaig' iyco
slfit fj d-vqa' iycjj slfit b noififjv b xa^og" xat iv tjj .Ano-
'/aXvipsf Eyco slfit Td .A xat to Q., fj dqxfj xat rd TiXog,
b nqwTog '/at b s'axaTog. ToXfirjTiov Toivvv slnslv anaqyfjv
fiiv naacov yqacpcJuv slvai Td EvayysXia, tcov de EvayysXicov dnaq-
yfjv TO xaTa Iwdvvrjv, ov Tdv vovv ovdstg 8'vvazaL Xa^siv fifj dva-
nsacbv int zd aTrjdog 'iqaov, firj8i Xa^cav dnd 'irjaov Tfjv Maqiav
yivofiivTjv '/at amov firjciqa. . . . "Eoti 8i nqoaa'xdfjvat and twv
vnd Ua'vXov Xsyofiivwv jisqt tov ndaav Tfjv Kaivfjv sivat Ta Evay
yiXia mav nov yqdcpjj', KaTd Td Evayy iXtdv fiov iv yqdfi-
fiaGi ydq Ila'vXnv ov'/ syofisv ^i^Xiov EvayyiXiov awfjdwg xaXo'v-
ftevov. .AXXd ndv o sx'ljqvaae '/at s'Xeye Td EvayysXiov r^v a '/at
ixi^qvaas '/at sXsys, Taika '/at syqacps' '/at a syqacpe dqa Evay
yiXiov rjv. El de Ta IlaiXov EvayyiXiov rjv, dxoXovdov Xiyetv,
OTt xat Td nizqov EvayyiXiov rjv x.t.X.
Comment, in Joh. Tom. V. p. 98 (Migne, vol. IV. p. 193).
J?rt nqoad-TjOw sig Tfjv tovtov dn68ei^iv qrjzdv dnoOToXixdv ftfj
vevorjfiivov vnd tcov tov Maq'/iwvog, '/at 8id to'vto ddeTO'vvTwv
Ta EvayyiXia, Td ydq Tdv dnoOToXov Xiyetv, xaTa to evay
yiXiov fiov iv XqtOTip 'irjaov, '/at fifj cpdaxeiv EvayysXia,
i'/slvoi icpiaTdvTsg cpaatv, ovx 'av nXsidvwv 'ovzcov EvayysXiwv Tdv
anoazoXov evtxwg to EvayyiXiov elqrjxivat' ov awiivTeg oti wg
eig ioTiv ov evayyeXi'QovTai nXeioveg, omwg sv iaTi tjj 8vvdfiEt

86 THE GOSPELS.
TO vnd Tc5v 7roXXwv svayysXiov dvaysyqafifiivov '/at to aXrjdcog
8id Tsaadqwv sv ioTt EvayyiXiov.
13. Dionysius of Alexandria.^
Ep. ad. Basilid. (Roii//i's Rei. Sac. Fo/. III. p. 223.)
'EniazsiXdg fioi, niaToiaTE '/at XoyicoraTe vii fiov, nvvd-avd-
fisvog xad' rjv wqav dnovrjaTiCsadat 8sl tjj tov ndaxa neqiXvaei.
Tivdg fiiv ydq tcHv d8sXcpwv Xiyetv cp-fjg ozt XQ'fj tovto noielv nqog
TfjV dXe'/Toqocpwviav, Tivdg 8i, oti dcp' saniqag XQ^- Ot fiiv ydq
iv 'Pcofijj d8EXcpot, wg cpaai, nsqifisvovai Tdv dXi'/Toqa' neqt 8i
TWV ivzavda sXsysg, otl zdxtov. '^4'/qi§rj 8e oqov iniTidivat l^ij-
Tslg, '/at wqav ndvv fiSfisTqrjfiivTjV onsq xat 8-vaxoXov xat acpa-
Xsqov ioTi. Td fiiv ydq, oti fisra tov T^g dvaaTaOEwg tov Kv
qiov fjfiwv xaiqdv yqfj "^ijg soqzrjg '/at Trjg evcpqoavvTjg ivdqxsadai,
fiixqig ixeivov Tdg ipvxdg Talg vrjaTeiaig Ta7ieivovvzag, vnd ndv
Twv bfioiwg bfioXoyrjdffieTat' xaTsa/s-vaaag 8i 8i' cbv syqaipdg
fiot ndvv vyiwg xat twv d-siwv EvayysXicov jjadrjfiivog att firjSsv
dnrjxqi^wfiivov iv amolg nsqt T^g wqag xad' rjv dviatrj, cpai-
vszai. Jtacpoqwg fiiv ydq ol svayysXiaTat Tovg int to fivrjfielov
sXdovTag aviyqaxpav xaTa xaiqovg ivrjXXayjiivovg, '/at ndvTsg ave-
arrj'/ora ¦f(8rj Tdv K'vqiov 'scpaaav evqrj/svaf '/at oi/'e aa^jidTcav,
tog b MaTdalog ems' xat nqwtag sti a'/OTiag ovarjg, wg 6 'iw
dvvrjg yqdcpst' '/at oqdqov ^adsog, wg b .Aovxdg' '/at Xiav nqcJi
dvaTsiXavTog TOii fjXiov, wg 6 Mdq'/og. Kat noTS fiiv dviaTij,
aacpwg ov8Etg dnscprjvaTO' otl de dxpi ffa/9/SaTWv t^ inicpwaxovajj
elg fiiav ffa/?/?aTWv, fisyqcg avaToX^g fjXiov TTjg fitdg aa^^duov,
ol int Td fivTjfielov naqayevofievoi, ov'/iTi xeifievov amdv iv avzcp
'/aTiXa§ov, tovto avwfioXoyrjTat. Kat firjSi 8tacpwveiv, firj8s ivav-
Ttovadai Tovg svayyeXiGTag nqdg dXXi^Xovg vnoXd^wfisv dXX' el
xat fii'/qoXoyia Tig eivat 86§ei neqt Td tijzovfievov el avftcpw-
vovvzeg ndvTeg iv i'/sivrj tjj vv/zt zd tov '/oajiov cpwg Tdv Kvqiov
* Dionysius was first head of the Catechetical School, and afterwards Bishop
of the Church, in Alexandria. His Episcopate was about A.D. 247-265. He is
famous for his views of the Apocalypse, which see below in our text from Eus.
H. E. VII. 27. His argument, drawn from internal considerations as regards
style, &c., concludes that the author of the Apocalypse did not write the Fourth
Gospel. He was a scholar and a critic, and on that account his testimony to the
four Evangelists in the text is all the more valuable. He cites the two Apostles
before the two companions of the Apostles.

DIONYSIUS OP ALEXANDRIA. EUSEBIUS. 87
fjficov dvaTETaX'/ivai nsqt ttjv wqav 8tacpEqovTat' dXX' fjfislg sv-
yvcofiovwg Td XsxdivTa '/at nioTwg dqfioaat nqodvftfjdwfisv.
14. Eusebius.
H. E. III. 24.
Ilsqt zrjg Ta^ewg tc5v EvayyeXiwv.
Wiqs 8i '/at tov8e tov dnoaroXov^ Tag dvavTi^^fjTovg iniarj-
fiTjvtofieda yqacpdg. Kat 8fj Td xaT^ amdv EvayyiXiov Talg vno
Tdv ovqavdv 8teyvwa fisvov i'/'/Xrjaiaig , nqwTOv dvofioXoyeiadco.
'Otl ye fifjv evXdywg nqdg tc3v dqyaiwv iv TerdqTj] fioiqcjc twv
dXXwv TqicJUv '/azsiXs'/Tai, Tamjj dv yivniTO dfjXov. Ol deaniaioi
'/at wg dXrjdwg dsonqsnslg, cprjfii 8i tov XqiGTOv TOvg a7roffTo'-
Xovg, TOV ^iov d'/qi^wg '/s'/adaqftivoi, '/at dqezfj ndajj Tdg ifJoydg
'/exoafiTjfiivoi , T-qv de yXioTTav l8iorzevovTeg , tjj ye fifjv nqdg tov
2wTijqog amolg 8E8coqrjfiivjj dsia xat naqaSo^onoicp 8vvdfiEi daq-
aovvTsg, Td fiiv iv nsidol '/at te'/vjj Xc'iycov Ta tov 8i8aa-/dXov
fiadfjfiaTa nqea^eveiv, o'me 'fj8eaav o'vze iveyeiqovv , tjj 8i tov
dsiov nvsvfiaTog tov awsqyovvTog amolg dno8si^si, '/at zjj 8t
avzwv awTsXovfiivjj davfiaTOvqycp tov XqiOTOv 8vvdfiSL fidvjj XQ^^^'
fiBvoi, Trjg TWV o-vqavcov ^aaiXsiag Tfjv yvwaiv int ndarjv '/aTiqy-
yeXov TrjP ol'/ovfiivrjv anov8fjg Tfjg neqt Td Xoyoyqacpelv fir/qdv
noiovfievot cpqovTi8a. Kat tovt snqaTTOv, aTS fisi^ovt xai vniq
avdqwnov i'^vnrjqEzo-Vfisvoi dtaxovt'^. '0 yovv IlavXog ndvzcav iv
naqaaxEv^ Xoywv 8vvazcjzazog vo-fjfiaai zs r/avcozazog ysyovcog,
ov nXiov TCOV ^qaxmdrwv iniaToXwv^ yQ^^Pli naqa8i8co'/E, '/aiTOi
ye fivqia '/at ano^^ra Xsysiv sxcov, drs twv fiixqig ovqavov Tqi-
Tov dswqrjfidTWv iniifJavaag, in' amov te Tdv deonqEnfj naqd-
• The previous chapter is occupied with incidents concerning the "disciple
whom Jesus loved, the Apostle and Evangelist John ; " the chief part being the
beautiful story of the young robber whom John reclaimed. It is quoted by Eu
sebius from Clem. Alex. This chapter (24) contains an account of the Gospels,
especially of John's relation to the Synoptists. The chief point of Eusebius's
statement is that John (omitting the genealogies) gives an account of earlier inci
dents in the Lord's public life than the others give. He intimates at the close
that John's first Ep. is undisputed; but that on the other two and on the Apo
calypse opinions were greatly divided. He also makes it clear that he believed
the Church — aud especially the Apostles who afterwards became Evangelists — to
have begun by oral preacliing; writing being the result of subsequent necessities.
' This may mean " very few letters," or it may have the same meaning as
Origen's o'XiYOUi; otixou; ^keoteiXe. See before, page 9, from Eus. H. E. VI. 25.

88 THE GOSPELS.
8eiaov avaqnaadetg, '/at tcov s'/elas qrjfidrwv d^q'fjtwv a'^iwdstg
ina'/ouaai. Ov'/ dnstqoi fiiv ovv vnfjqxov twv avTWV '/at oi Xot-
not TOV 2wTfjqog fjficov cpoiTrjTat, 8i68E'/a fiiv dnoazoXoi, s^8o-
ffff/ovTa 8i fiadrjzat, dXXot ts int TO'VTOig fivqiot. "Ofiwg 8i ovv
E^ dnaawv twv tov Kvqiov 8iaTqL§wv vnofivfjfiaTa MaTdalog
fjfiiv '/at 'iwdvvrjg fidvoi xaTaXeXoinaaiv , ovg '/at indvay/eg int
Trjv yqacpfjV iXdslv '/aTiysi Xoyog. Mardalog fisv ydq nqoTsqov
'E^qaioig xijqv^ag, wg ijfisXXev xat icp sTsqovg livai, narqiqr
yXcoTTj] yqacpfj naqaSovg rd '/aT amdv EvayyiXiov, Td Xslnov Ty
amov naqovaicf, TO'VTOig dcp' div iaTsXXsTO, 8 id Tfjg yqaq>fjg dns-
nXiqqov. "H8q 8i Mdq'/ov '/at ylov/d zwv /aT amovg EvayyeXiwv
rfjv Ex8oGiv nsnoirjfisvwv, 'iwdvvrjv cpaat, Tdv ndvTa yqdvov dyqdcpii)
'/exqrjfiivov '/rjqvyjiaTt, TiXog '/at snt rfjv yqacprjv iX^slv T0ida8e
xdqiv atTt'ag. Twv nqoavayqacpivTwv Tqtwv elg jcavrag rj8rj '/at
elg avTdv 8 ia8e8o fiivwv, dno8s^aad-ai fiiv cpaatv, dX-fjdsiav amolg
inifiaqrvq-fjaavTa , fiovrjv de dqa Xeinead-at tjj yqacpfj Trjv nsqt
TWV ev nqcoToig '/at '/ar' dqyjjv tov '/rjqvyfiaTog vnd tov XqtOTOv
nsnqay fiivwv 8irjyrjaiv. Kat dXrjdrjg ye 6 Xoyog. Tovg Tqelg yovv
evayyeXiOTdg avvi8slv ndqeOTt, fiova Ta fiszd Tfjv iv Tcp decr^ttw-
Trjqiqi Iwdvvov Tofj ^anTiOTOv '/ddstq^tv icp' sva ivtavTdv ns
nqay fisva Tip 2wTfjqt avyysyqacpazag , amo ts tovt' iniarjfirjva-
fiivovg '/aTaqydg Tfjg amwv lazoqiag. Mszd yovv T-qv Tsaaaqa-
xovTa'fjfisqov vrjOTsiav '/at Tdv in avrij nsiqaOftdv tov xqovov T^g
tdiag yqacprjg o fisv MaTdalog 8qXol Xsywv
Anovaccg Si OTl 'Imdvvrjg TtaQsSod-ij, avsj^oiQrjasv uno trig 'lovdaiitg
iig TtjV rakiXttiav.
'0 8i Mdqxog cbaamwg'
Mera Ss ro TtaqaSod^vai,
cpTjatv, 'TcoavvTJv 'f]Xd-iv 6 'Irjaovg iig tjjv raldciictv.
Kat b .Aov'/dg 8i nqtv dq^aadai tcov tov Ttjoov nqd^swv, na-
qanXrjoiwg iniTijqsl cpdaxwv,
Sig aqa TtQoa&sig HQCodrjg olg diSTrqd^aTO jtovrjQolg xttTixkEiOe tdv
Icodvvrjv iv cpvXaxy.
IlaqaxXrjdivra d^ ovv tovtwv svsxd cpaat Tdv dnoaroXov 'Iw-

EUSEBIUS. 89
avvrjv TOV vnd twv nqoziqwv EvayysXiaTihv naqaaiconrjd svt a XQa-
vov, '/at Ta '/aTd tovtov nsnqay fisva tw 2wTfjqi {Tama 8' fjV Ta
nqd Tr-jg tov ^anziazov xadsiq^swg) zip '/ar avrdv svayyeXioj
naqa8ovvat, amo ye tovt' intarjfnqvaadat, to'tb jtiev cpqaavza'
Ta-VTrjv apJJ^v i;ro/jj(J£ rmv ^agadoicav 6 'IrjSovSi
TOTS de fivijfiovsvaavTa tov ^anTtaTov fisTa^v tcjjv 'Itjoov nqa-
^scov, cog STL TOTS /SaTTTi^ovTOg ev .Alviav iyyvg tov ^aXstfi, aa
cpwg Te Toi;To SrjXovv sv Tcp Xiysiv
OvTica yaQ r]v lariivvrig ^s^krjfisvog itg ttJv (pvlaxriv.
Ov'/ovv b fiiv 'Iwdvvrjg Ty toC xot' amdv svayysXiov yqacpfj, Ta
firj8inw TOV ^anTiOTOv sig cpvXa'/fjv ^s^Xrjfiivov nqdg tov XqiOTofj
nqaxdivza naqa8i8watv, ol 8i Xoinot Tqslg svayysXiaTat Td fiSTd
Trjv elg to 8eaficoTrjqiov y.ddeiq^tv zov ^anziazoiJ fivrjfiove'vovaiv.
Otg xat eniGTrjaavTi ovxst dv Sd^aiev 8iacpwvelv aXXrjXotg Ta
EvayyiXia, Tip Td fiiv '/aTa 'Iwdvvrjv rd nqcJJTa twv Toi; XqtOTOv
7tqd^Ewv nsqiixEiv, Ta 8i Xoind Tfjv int TiXst tov xQOVov avTip
ysysvTjfiivrjV loToqiav etxoTWg yoiiv t^v fiiv Trjg aaq'/dg tov Aw
Trjqog fjfiwv ysvsaXoyiav drs MuTdaiii) '/at ytov/^ nqoyqacpslaav,
a7Coaiwnfjaat Tyv 'Iwdvvrjv, Trjg de dsoXoyiag dndq^aadai ihadv
avTcp nqdg tov dsiov nvsvfiaTog oia xqsLTTOVL naqanscpvXayjii-
VTjg. TavTa fiiv ovv fjfiiv nsqt Tfjg tov '/ard 'iwdvvrjv EvayysXiov
yqacprjg Blqfjadw. Kat T^g xaTa Mdqxov de fj ysvofiivrj alzia iv
Tolg nqoadsv fjfiiv dsSrjXwTat. '0 de ylovr/dg dqyofisvog xat av-
Tog Toi; xaT awTOv avyyqdjifiaTog Tfjv alriav nqovdrj'/s, 8l rjv
nsnoirjTat Tfjv avvra^iv 8rjXwv tSg 'dqa noXXwv xat 'dXXwv nqo-
nsTEGTsqov intTETrj8s'vx6Twv 8t'fjyrjatv nonqaaadat cov amdg ns-
nXrjqocpoqrjvo Xoywv, avayxaicog dnaXXdzzwv fjfidg Trjg nsqt Tovg
aXXovg afupyqioTov vnoXiqipEwg zdv dacpaXfj Xoyov wv amdg I'/a-
vwg Trjv dX-ffdeiav '/aTsiX-fjCpst, ex T^g a;ifa IlavXcji awovaiag te
'/at SioTqi^fjg '/at Tyg TtSv Xomwv dnoGToXwv bfiiXiag cocpeXrjfii-
vog, 8td TOV l8iov naqidwxev EvayyeXiov. Kat Tama jiiv fjfielg
nsqt TO'VTWV ' olxstoTsqov 8i '/ard '/aiqdv 8id Trjg twv aqyaicov na-
qadiascog Td '/at Tolg dXXoig nsqt amwv slqrjjiiva nsiqaadfisda
8rjXc5aai.^ Twv 8i 'iwdvvov avyyqafifidTwv nqdg zip svayysXici)
'/at fj nqoTsqa twv intOToXcov naqd ts Tolg vvv '/at naqd Tolg
^ One of his many unfulfilled intentions,

90 THE GOSPELS.
aqyaioig dvaftcpiXs'/Tog wfioXoyrjTai, dvTiXiyovzat de al Xotnal 8vo.
Trjg 8i 'u4no'/aX-vipEwg sig Exdzsqav sti vvv naqd Tolg noXXolg
neqiiX'/STttt fj 86^a. 'Ofioiwg ye fifjv ex T^g twv dqxaiwv fiaq-
Tvqiag iv olxsiii) xaiqip Tfjv inixqiaiv 8i^STat '/at avT-rj.*
Demonstratio evangel. III. 5. MaTdalog dnoaToXog zov
nqoTsqov ^iov ov'/ dnd asfivfjg 8taTqL^fjg wqftuTO, ix 8i tcov
dficpt -zdg TsXwviag '/at nXsovs^iag axoXaCovTwv. Tofko ovSstg
TWV EvayyEXiGTwv i8'fjXwaEV, ovx o awanoaToXog avTov Icodwrjg,
ov8s ys .Aovxdg, ov8i Maq'/og, dSi MaTdalog Tdv savTOv OTrj-
XiTsiJiov ^iov '/at '/aT'Tjyoqog amdg savTov yiyvofisvog. Encixovaov
yovv onwg 8ia^qrri8rjv in' ovofiaTog avzov fiifivrjzat iv Tip nqdg
avTov yqacpivzi EvayysXicjj tovtov Xiywv Tdv Tqonov. "Kat naq-
dywv i'/sldsv b 'irjaovg eldev avdqwnov xad'fjfisvov int zd ts-
XtovLov, MaTdaiov ovofiaTt, '/at sinsv amcp, dxoXovdet fioi. Kat
avaardg rj/oXovdrjasv amip. Kat iyivsro dvaxsifiivov amov iv
TJj ol'/icc, xat l8ov noXXot TsXwvat '/at dfiaqTwXot awavixsivTo
Tip Irjaov xat Toig fiadrjzalg amov." Kat ndXiv nqo'icuv e'^fjg,
TOV TE '/aToXoyov tcov fiadrjTwv i^aqidjio-vfievog , amdg savTip Td
TOV TsXcavov ovofia nqoaTidrjaiv. .Aiyet 8' ovv "Twv de dw-
8sr/a anoOToXwv Ta ovdfiazd iazi TuvTa' nqwzog 2ifiwv b Xe-
yofievog ItsTqog '/at 'u4v8qiag o dSsXipdg amov, 'idxw^og b tov
Ze(}e8aiov -xat 'Icodvvrjg b dSeXcpdg amov, OiXtnnog '/at Baq-
doXofialog, Qwjidg '/at MaTdalog b TeXafvrjg." Omwg jiiv b
MaTdalog 8t' v7teq^oX'fjv intei'/eiag Td tpiXdXrjdss vnocpaivcov tov
l8iov Tqonov '/at TsXcovrjv samdv dnsxdXsi, fifj dnoxq'vnTwv Tdv
nqoTsqov savrov §iov, '/at tov av^'vyov 8svTeqov savrdv '/aTsXeysv.
AvvEt,svyfiivog yovv Tip Qiofi^, b IliTqog '.AvSqscx xat 'ld'Aw§og
Tcp Iwdvvjjj xat (BiXmnog BaqdoXofiaiiji , nqoTaTTSi savTov Tdv
Qwfidv, nqoTtfiwv wg xqeiTTOva tov GvvanoGToXov, tc3v Xotncov
evayysXiGTdJv tovvuvtIov nenoirj/oTwv. ".A'/ove yovv .Aovxa, nwg,
TOV MaTdaiov fivyfiovevaag, ov zeXiovyv bvofidCet, ov8' vncrzaTiet
Tcp Qwfi^, '/qsizTova de amdv eidwg, nqwzov amdv '/uTiXe^ev,
SevTsqov Tdv Qwfiav inayaycov, wansq '/at b Mdqxog neno'trjxev
s'xovai 8i amov al Xs^sig omwg' "Kat ote fjfiiqa iysvsTo, icpco-
wqas TOvg fiadrjzdg amov, '/at k/Xe^dfievog i§ amwv 8c68exa, ovg
'/at dnooToXovg wvofiaaev, 2ificova, ov /at i/dXeae IIsTqov, xat
* Here follows the classification of the books as admitted, &c., given before
at page 10. (Eus. H. E. IIL 25.)

EUSEBIUS. 91
.Av8qiav tov dSsXcpdv amov, 'ld'/w§ov '/at 'Iwdvvrjv, '/at 0iXin-
nov '/at BaqdoXofialov, '/at MaTd-alov xat Qwfidv." OvTwg jisv
Tdv MaTdaiov 6 yicrvxdg iTifirjaev, ~/ad' a naqi8w'/av amcp ol
anaqxfjg ctmonTai xat vnrjqiTat yevofisvot tov Xoyov. Kat Tdv
Iwdvvrjv 8s bfiolov svqoig av Tip MaTdaicp. 'Ev fiiv ydq ralg
iniGToXalg amov ov8s fiv-fjfirjv T^g olxeiag nqoarjyoqiag noislTat
rj nqsa^'VTsqov savTdv dvofid^et, ov8afiov 8i dnooToXov, ov8i ev-
ayysXiGTrjv iv de t^ E'vayysXiq) iniarjfirjvdfiEvog, ov fjydna b 'Irj
aovg, ov/ s8'fjXcoaEv ovofiaOTt savzov.
"0 ye fifjv IIsTqog ov8e '/adij/ev ini Tfjv EvayysXiov yqa-
cpfjv 8t svXa^siag vnsq^oX'fjv. Tomov BIdqxog yvdqifiog '/at
cpoiTrjcfjg ysyoviog dnofivyfiovevaat XsysTat Tag Toii Hirqov nsqt
Tt3v 7cqd^£wv TOV 'irjGov 8tdXi^Eig, og iXdiov in' i'/slva Tfjg
loToqiag, iv otg 6 'Iqaovg iqwTrjaag, Tiva cpaatv amdv ol dv-
d-qwnot, "/at avTot 8i ol avzov fiadrjial, ziva 8d^av eyotev
neqt avToiJ, vna'/ovaavTog tov ItsTqov, dig neqt XqtaTOV, ov-
8iv d7co'/qtvd fisvov Tdv 'irjaovv ov8s Xiyovza amcp yqdcpst, dXX'
OTl insTifirjasv avTolg, 'iva firjdsvt Xiywat neqt amov. Ov ydq
7caqfjv b Mdq'/og Tolg vnd tov 'Irjaov Xexdelatv, dXX' ov8i Ili
Tqog TU nqdg amdv '/at neqt amov Xsxdivza Tip 'Irjaov edt-
xai'oD dt oixsiag nqoacpiqEiv fiaqTvqiag. Tiva de rjv Ta nqdg
amdv Xsxdivza, MaTdalog 8rjXol 8td TO'VTWV "'Yfielg 8i Tiva
fie Xiysre eivat; ^noxqtd-etg 8i 2,ifiwv Itizqog einev, av et 6
Xqiazog b vldg tov Qeov tov ^cJovTog. '.Ano'/qtdetg 8i 'irjaovg
elnev amcp. Ma'/dqiog el 2ifiwv Baqiwvd, ozt adq§ '/at aifia
ov'/ ane'/dXvtpi aot, dXX' b nazfjq fiov b iv Tolg ovqavolg, '/at
syd aot Xsyw 2v et Ilirqag xat int Tamrjv Tfjv nsTqav olxo-
Sofiiqaw fiov T'fjv sx'/Xrjaiav, xat n-vXat d8ov ov xaTiax'vaovaiv av-
Tfjg' xat dwffw aot Tag '/Xelg Tfjg ^aaiXsiag twv ovqavwv xat oaa
av Sr'jarjg int Trjg yfjg, sOTai 8e8ifieva iv Tolg ovqavolg' '/at oaa
av X'vajjg int Trjg yrjg soTat XsXvfiiva iv Tolg ovqavolg.'''' Toaov-
Torv elqrjfiivwv Tip IIsTqCj) vnd tov 'Irjaov, b Mdq/og firj8iv tov
twv fivrjfiovsvaag, oti firj8' b IliTqog Tavd', cog sl/dg, iv Talg
ai'Tov 8i8aa'/aXiaig i^rjyoqsvaEv, bqa tl cprjaiv, iqcoTrjaavTog tov
'Irjaov' "'.Ano'/qidstg b UsTqog Xiyst, ai) el o X^otffTo'g. Kat ine-
TifirjOev amolg, 'iva firj8evt Xiycoat neqt amov." Tavza fiiv ovv
b nizqog sl'/dzwg naqaaiwndadai ij^iov 8id '/at Maqxog avzd
naqiXinev zd 8s xaTa t(}v dqvrjaiv amov sig jcdvrag ix'fiqv^ev

92 THE GOSPELS.
dvdqionovg. 'Ensl '/at s/Xavasv in aizfj nt'/qwg. Miqoig 8 ovv
Tdv Mdq'/ov laraqovvza nsqt amov Tade; "Kat ovTOg TOv Ili-
Tqov iv Tjj a-vXfj, sq'XSTai nqdg a'irzdv fiia twv nai8iGxcov tov aq-
XLsqiwg, '/at l8ovaa amdv d-sqfiaivofisvov ifi^Xiipaaa avTcp Xiyst'
Kat av fiSTa 'Irjaov tov NaCaqaiov rjg. '0 8s rjqvrjaaTO Xiywv'
o'me iniaTUfiai ti av Xsysig' '/at i^rjXdsv elg to e'^w nqoavXtov,
xat dXi'/Twq icpcivrjasv. IldXiv Si l8ovaa amdv fj nat8ia'/rj yq-
^UTO Xiysiv Tolg naqsOTwaiv OvTog i§ amSrv ianv 0 de nd
Xiv rjqvrjaaTO. Kat fisrd fitxqdv ndXiv naqeGTcaxeg eXsyov Tip
IliTqci)' '.AXrjdcog s§ amwv bi, '/at ydq FaXiXalog st. 'O di rjq-
^aTO dvadsfiaTiCsLV '/at ofivvsiv, 'otl Ovx oiSa tov avdqwnov tov
tov, ov XiysTS ' xat evdiwg ex SevTiqov dXixTwq icpcovrjasv." Mdq
'/og ftiv Tama yqdcpet. IliTqog 8 i' Tama nsqt savTov fiaqTvqsi'
ndvza ydq Ta naqd Mdq'/Cjj tcov TIsTqov 8taXs^swv sivat XiysTat
'AnofivTjfiovs'VfiaTa. Ol 8'^ ovv Td fiiv So^avra amolg dyadfjv
cpiqsiv cprjfirjv naqaiTOVfisvot, Tag 8i '/ad' savTwv dta^oXdg sig
dXrjOTOv alwva xazayqdcpovTsg, '/at tcov nXrjfifisXrjdivTWv avTolg
Tdg '/aTrjyoqiag, ag ovx dv Tig s'yvw twv jiteTa TaiiTa, ct ^tt^ 8id
Trjg amcov s'fiadsv cpwvfjg '/ad' savTwv aTrjXiTe-vovTeg, ncog o-v cpi-
Xavriag fiiv dndarjg xat ipsvdoXoyiag exTog ysyovivat iv8ixcog av
OfioXoyolvTO, cptXaX'Tjdovg 8i Stadiascog aacp^ xat ivaqyfj TB'/firjqia
naqsayrj/ivai ;
Ol 8i ys Tovg ToiovaSe nsnXdadat xat xaTuxpsijaaad-at vo-
fii^ovTsg, '/at oia nXdvoig ^Xaacprjfislv nsiqcofiEvot , ncog ovx dv
yivoivzo '/azayiXaazoi; cpiXot fiiv cpdovov /at ^ao'/aviag, sxdqot
8s avTrjg aXrjdsiag dXia'/dfisvot , oH, ye TOvg omwg dnavovq-
yovg xat dnXaarov cog dXrjdcog xat dxiqatov rjdog 8id twv ol-
xsiwv Xoywv ini8s8eiyfiivovg, navo'vqyovg Ttvdg xat Setvovg vno-
TidevTat aocptOTag, cog to fifj ovza nXaaafiivovg xai zip ol'/eic^)
8i8aG'/dXcp Ta jifj nqdg amov nqaydivTa XBxaqtGfiivwg dvadiv-
Tag. 'i2g sv fiot 8o'/sl slqfiadat' ndvTa XQ^ ntOTEVBiv rolg toij
Irjaov fiadrjcalg, 'fj fiiq' '/at sl fiovoig Tomoig Tolg dvSqdaiv dni-
azrjziov, '/at Tolg ndaiv, o'tTivig nor' dqa naq' 'EXXrjatv, rj naqd
(laq^dqoig ^iovg xat Xoyovg xat dnofivrjfiovsvfiuTa twv xaTa xqo
vovg ini Ttfftv dyadolg '/aToqddfiaat ^orjdirzcov awsyqdtpavTo'
rj Tolg fiiv dXXoig niaTSVEiv svXoyov, jic'rvotg 8i TO'VTOig dntaTslv.
Kat nwg ovx sficpavfjg b cpdovog; Ti 8s; ol xazaxpEvSofiBvoi
TOV 8t8aa'/aXov, '/at Td jifj ysyovaza tjj avrwv naqa8i86vTEg

EUSEBIUS. 93
yqacpfj, aqa '/at Ta nddrj '/azsipsvaavzo avzov; T'fjv svdg Xiyio
fiadrjTcov icqo8oaiav, '/at Tfjv twv av/ocpavTwv '/aTrjyoqiav, xXsvag
TE '/at Siaavqfiovg dixaffTwv, Ta'g Te v^qsig '/at Tag nXr^ydg Tag
'/uTd nqoaconov , fidoTiydg te xaTa vwTOf, '/at Tdv i^ axav&wv
aTicpavov int aTifiiijc 7iBqiTtdsfiEvov amcp, cpoivt'/ovv ze "xizwva iv
xXafiv8og axfjfiazL nBqt^XrjdivTa , '/at TiXog, amdv avTd Td zov
azavqov zqanaiov snt'/Ofii^ovTa' iv tovzcjJ te jcqyvvfiivov , '/at
Xslqctg /at n68ag '/aTaneiqofievov, 'o^et re noTt'Qo fisvov, xat naio-
fiEvov xaTa '/d^^r^g xaXdfiti), '/at nqdg tcSv bqcovTwv ovei8i^6fiB-
vov; '^XXd ydq '/at Tavza '/at 'oaa zomoig avficpiqezat bfioiwg
nE7tXdadai yqfj nqdg tcov amov fiad-TjTciv, 'fj iv TO-vTOtg fiiv xqfj
niaTSvsiv avTolg wg dXrjdeaTdTOtg , iv 8i Tolg int86^oig xat
aefivoTiqoig dniazElv. Kat nddsv zd nsqt amovg ivavziov 86yfia
avar-fiasTai ; Td ydq dXrjdevBiv TOvg airzovg cpdvat, '/at 'sv Tip
avTip \pB-v8Eadai, ov8iv ioTiv 'rj TavavTia xaTa to avTd nsqt tcov
amwv Xiysiv.
Tig ovv 6 TO'VTWV sXsyxog; El ydq 8fj nXdTTsadat avTolg a'/o-
ndg rjv '/at Xoyoig ipEv8iat Tdv 8t8daxaXov '/oofislv, ov/ dv nore
avzolgTU nqosiqrjfiiva '/aTsyqacpov, ov8' dv i8fjXovv rolg fiezdzavTa
avdqwnoig, OTt 8fj iXvnelTO, '/at fjSrjjiovet '/at TBTdqa'/TO Tfjv xpvxfjv,
ozt amot avzdv anoXtnovzeg cpxovTO' fj bzi 6 ndvzwv amwv nqo-
'/sxqifiivog anoaToXog ze '/at jiadrjcfjg amov Ilirqag ^aadvwv exTog
'/at aqxovcixfj'g dnetXfjg Tqirov avzdv i^wfioaazo. Tama ydq xdv
dXXwv XeyovTwv, xqfjV Sfjnovdsv dqvsiadat Tovg ov8iv 'dXXo 'rj ^a-
qitjSadat Ttt asfivoTsqa Tip dtdaa'/dXcij nqoTedeifiivovg. Ei de ipt-
XaXydsig iv zolg amov a'/vdqwnolg Sirjyi'jfiaat cpaivovzat, noXv
fidXXov iv Totg ivSo^oTiqotg etev dv tolovtoi. Tovg ydq dna^
ipBv8eadat nqoeXofiivovg, Ta Xvnrjqd XQW JidXXov ixcpvyslv rjzot
8id aiwnrjg, rj 8id Trjg neqt amwv aqvfjaewg, iifj dXXwg tiov oxpi-
yovwv iXiy^ai 8vva fiivwv Ta asatyrjfiiva. .did tl ydq fifj sipev-
aavTo, xat scprjaav, 'otl 'Iov8ag fiiv b nqo8ovg amdv cptX-fjfiaTi,
ToXfirqaag to a'iifi^oXov ivSsi^aadat Tfjg nqo8oaiag, anoXidwdsirj
avzixa' b 8e qaniaat avzdv ToXftfjaag, ^rjqdg naqaxqfjfia ysvoiTO
Trjv Ss^idv b 8' aqxtsqevg Ka'idcpag, wg dv avvrqixcov TOtg xaT
amov av/ocpdvTatg nyqwdeirj rdg oipEtg; J id Tt de fifj sxpsv-
aavTO ndvTsg, otl firjSiv axvdqwndv dXr^dcog nBqt amdv ysyovsv;
.AXX b fiiv dqiavfjg rjv '/aTayeXdaag ovtwv tov StxaaTrjqtov oi de
ini^ovXevovzeg , vnd cpavTaaiag dsrjXdTOv nXavcofiEvoi , iveqyslv

94 THE GOSPELS.
'/az amov fifj naqovTog i86xovv ; Ti 8' ' dqa ov/ rjv asfivoTsqov
TOV nXdrrsad ai , oti twv toicovSs notrjzfjg s'qycov naqaSo^wv yi-
yovB, Td yqdcpeiy 'oti jirjSiv fiiv dvdqconivov, fir^Si dvrjzdv neqt
avzdv avvi^rj, ivdscjj de 8vvdfiet zd ndvTa '/aTaSrjadfievog , Trjv
elg ovqavo'vg indvo8ov jiSTd dBiorsgag do^ryg inorfjaaTO; Ov ydq
8fj TO'VTotg dniazslv sjisXXov ol Talg dXXaig amwv Strjyqaeai
neniaTsv/OTsg. Ol 8 ovv firjSiv Tyg dXrjdsiag iv Toig ansficpai-
vovai '/at a'/vdqwnolg naqayaqd^avzeg ncog ov/ dv elev d^ioi
•/at iv TOtg Xoinolg, oig ifiaqz'vqr/aav amcp Ta naqd8o^a, q>av-
Xrjg exTog vnovoiag '/adsaTavai;
^mdqxrjg fiiv ovv xat fj Twvde Tvyxdvsi nsqt tov 2cmrj-
qog fjficov fiaqTvqia. Ov8iv 8i oTov ex nsqiovaiag xat Tip i^
'E^qaiwv 'Iwafjncjj jidqTvqt XQ^jOaadat, og ev Tip o^tTwxatdexaVw
T^g 'lov8at'/fjg '.AqyatoXoyiag, Ta xaTa TO-vg IliXdzov x^ovotig
loToqwv, fiifivrjTat tov SwTrjqog fjfiwv iv TO'VTOig. ^"FivSTOt 8i
'/ut' i'/Eivov TOV XQ^'^'O'*' 'irjaovg, aocpdg dvfjq, stys dv8qa amdv
Xiysiv xqy- ^Hv ydq naqa86^wv s'qywv noirjvrjg, 8i8da'/aXog dv-
dqconwv TdXrjdfj ae^Ofiivwv '/at noXXovg fiiv tov 'lov8a'i'/cw,
noXXovg 8i '/at 'EXXrjvt'/ov inrjydyeTO. '0 XqiGTdg ohTog rjv.
Kat avzwv evdei^et tc5v naq' rjfilv dqxovzwv OTavqip iniTSTi-
fiTj'/dzog IIiXdTov, ovx inavaavTo ol to nqwTOv dyanfjaavTsg.
'Ecpdvq ydq amolg TqiTrjv fjfiiqav ndXiv twv, twv d-sicov nqocpq-
Twv Tavzd TE xat dXXa fivqia nsqt amov slqrjUoTwv. "Odsv
slairt vvv dnd T0v8e tcSv XqiaTiavdv ov/ iniXine Td cpvXov."
El Toivvv xat xaTa tov iffTO^txov ftaqTvqsiTai, ov fiovov Tovg 8(o-
8e'/a dnooToXovg, ov8i Tovg s^SofiitjxovTa fiadrjcdg i^Cjj'xeicofii-
vog, aXXd noXXovg fiiv tov 'lov8a'i'/ov, noXXovg 8i tov 'EXXrjvi-
¦/ov nqoaayofievog, SfjXog dv e'trj nsqiTzov tl xs'/Trjfiivog naqd
TOvg Xoinovg avdqionovg. JlcSg ydq dv dXXwg nqoafjysTO tov
'lov8a'i'/ov xat tov 'EXXrjvi'/ov nXs'iovg sl fifj Tiai davfiaoTolg '/at
naqa86§oig s'qyoig, xat ^svi^ovajj xixqrjzo 8i8aaxaXicf; Maqzvqei
8i xat fj zwv Ilqd^ewv tcov .AnooToXwv yqacpfj, 'otl noXXat fiv-
qid8sg r^aav lovSaiwv av8qd)v nsnstafiivwv avzdv stvat zov Xqi-
ardv TOV Qsov Tdv vnd tc3v nqocprjiwv 'xazrjyysX fisvov '/at fj
« This celebrated passage from Josephus is generally believed to be inter
polated. The doubtful passages o' XptcjTo? ouTo; ir]v, and ^<pdvT) y"P "UTOIS TpiTTQV
TlpiEpav TcdXiv ?(ov, X.T.X. are perhaps marginal notes by a Christian reader which
early crept into the Jewish historian's text.

EUSEBIUS. EPIPHANIUS. 95
lazoqia de xaTe'/et, wg xat fisyiaTrj Tig rjv i'/'/Xrjaia Xqiazov iv
TOtg 'isqoaoXvfioig, dnd 'lov8aiwv avy/qoTovfiivq, fiiyqc tcov yqd-
vwv Tf/g xkt' 'u48qtavdv noXioqxiag. .AsyovToi yovv ol nqwTOt
xaTa 8ia8oxfjv nqoaTdvTsg aizodt inia'/onoi 'lovSalot ysyovivat,
wv xat ovoftaza slaiTi vvv naqd TOig iyxwqioig fivrifiovs-vsTat'
cog '/at ex tovtcov XsXvadai ndaav Tfjv '/aTa tcov fiadrjTwv amotj
8ia^oXfjV, OTE '/at nqdg amwv, xat diya Trjg avzwv fiaqTvqiag, fivqia
bfioXoyslTat nXrjdrj 'lovSatwv ze /at 'EXX-fjvcov avzdg 'irjaovg b Xqt-
azdg TOV Qeov 81 cov insTsXei naqa8d^wv s'qywv icp' savzdv ns-
noirjfiivog. .AXXd tovtcov fjftlv int Toaomov slqqfiivwv, nqdg Td
nqwTov TWV dnioTwv Tdyfia, cpiqs, '/at nqdg to Ssmeqav OTlcpog
svaTWfiEv. Tovzo 8i rjv zd twv awofioXoyovvTwv fiiv Tdv 'Irjaovv
Ta naqd8o^a nsnoiTj'/ivai, yorjTsicje de dXXwg int nXdvy tc5v bqoiv-
Tcov, oia davfiaTOvqydv rj cpaqfia'/ia Tivd, davjiaazwaai 'TOvg
fcaqovzag.

15. Epiphanius.^
Haeres. II. t. I. h. 51 (contra haeresim quae non suscipit
Ev. Joannis et Apocalypsin). MaT^aiog ydq nqCkog dqxsTai
svayysXiCsadai. Tomit) ydq rjv E7ztTETayfiivov to EvayyiXiov 'xrj-
qv^ai an' dqxfjg, cog '/at iv dXXrj alqiast nsqi tovtov 8td nXd-
zovg eiqrjxafiev. Ov8sv 8i fjfidg. Xvmqast '/at avdig nsqt twv av-
Tcov StaXafi^dvsiv, elg nttqdoTaatv Trjg dXrjd-eiag, xat sXsyxov tcov
nenXavrjfiivwv. OvTog Toivvv b MaTdalog xaTa^iomai Td Evay
yiXiov, wg scprjv, xat Si'/aioTaTa rjv. "E8bl ydq Tdv dnd noXXiov
afiaqTrjfidTwv iniGTqirpavza '/at dnd tov zeXwveiov dvaardrTa
Tip iXdovTi int awzrjqicjt Tip yivei twv dvdqdnwv, '/at Xiyovzi '
' Epiphanius was still living and at work in extreme old age when Jerome
wrote his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical writers (A.D. 392). He was a native of Pa
lestine, Bishop of Constantia (Salamis) in Cyprus about A.D. 367. Seven or eight
years afterwards he began his Panarium, or great work against Heresies. He
wrote a book called the Ancorate, and one on weights and measures. He is an
interesting but not trustworthy chronicler and is apt to let his fancy run away
with him. But he has preserved interesting extracts from some heretical books,
and several curious fioating traditions regarding the Canonical Scriptures. (See
Introduction : ' Gospel of Hebrews,' &c.) He denounced all apocryphal books, the
only exception being his respectful references to a book he calls "The Constitu
tion of the Apostles," concerning which see before, at page 25. See full discus
sion, Lardner, 11.421; Bunsen's Analecta Antenicaena; and Hefele's Hist, of
Councils.

96 THE GOSPELS.
Ov'/ rjXdov '/aXiaai Si/aiovg, dXXd dfiaqTwXovg sig fiBTavoiav, sig
vn68eiyfia f^filv Tt3v fieXXovTwv ad^eadai, Tip iv Tip TeXwvsicj)
dvaxdivTi, '/at dnd d8i'/iag dvaazqixpavzi , naqaayiadat to '/i-
qvyfta T^g awTrjqiag, 'iv' dn' amov fiddwatv ol avdqwnoi Trjv
TTjg naqovaiag cptXavdqwniav. MsTd ydq Tqv acpsatv tcov afiaq
Tiwv iSwqfjaoTo amip '/at avdaraaiv VB'/qwv, xat '/adaqaiv Xs-
nqag, '/at lafidrwv 8vvdfiBig, xat dniXaatv 8atfi6vwv, 'Iva fifj fio
vov dnd TOV Xoyov TCBiajj TOvg d'/ovovTag, aXXd xat an avzov
TOV sqyov '/rjqv^at svayyiXia Tolg anoXXvfiivoig, otl evqedrjaovrai
8id fieravoiag, 'xat Tolg nenTw/oaiv, oti dvaaT'fjaovTat, xai Tolg
Tsdvrj/oaiv, otl Kwoyovrjdfjaovzat. Kat ovzog fiiv ovv o MaT
dalog 'E^qar/olg yqdfifiaat yqdcpsi to EvayyiXiov, '/at xrjqvTTsi.
Kat dqxBTOL ovx dn' dqxfjg, dXXd 8irjyeiTat fiiv ttjv ysvsaXoyiav
dnd Tov '.A^qadfi. . . .
Ei-dvg de ^teTa tov MaTdaiov d'/dXovdog ysvofievog b Mdqxog
Tip dyioj niTqijj iv 'Pdfijj, iniTqinsTai Td EvayyiXiov i/diadaf
'/at yqdipag dnoaTsXXeTai vnd tov dyiov Hirqav eig Tfjv twv
.Alyv7CTiwv ydqav. OvTog 8i Big iTvyyavEv ex twv s^Sofirj'/ov-
Ta8-vo Tibv 8iaa'/oqntadivTwv int Tip qfjjiaTi, cp emsv o Kvqtog '
'Eav fifj Tig fiov cpdyjj Trjv adq'/a, '/at nirj Td atfia, ovx sGTt fiov
d^iog' wg TOtg Ta EvayyiXia dvayvovat aacpfjg fj naqdaTaaig.
"Ofiwg 8id nsTqov dva/dfiipag EvayyeXi^sadaL '/aza^iomai, nvs'u-
fiaTi dyii>} ifinBcpoqrjfiivog. "u4qxsTat de '/rjq'VTTStv, 'odsv to nvBVfia
amip naqBXBXs'vaaTO, ttjv dqxfjv tcttwv aTro nBVTB'/aiSs'/dTOv sTOvg
Tipsqiov Kaiaaqog, fiszd szrj zqtdxovra Trjg tov Mazd-aiov nqa-
yfiuTsiag. JsvTsqov 8i ysvofiivov svayysXiaTOv, xat fifj nsqt T^g
dvwdsv '/OTaywyfjg Qsov Aoyov TrjXavywg arjfidvavrog ' dXXd ndvzrj
fiiv ificpavTtxwg, ov fifjv x«Ta d'/qt^oXoyiav -toaavTrjv, yiyovs Tolg
nqoeiqqfievoig , sig SsvTEqov G'/otwglv tcov 8tavorjfidTwv , tov fifj
'/aTa^iwdfjvat nqdg cpwTtGfidv tov EvayysXiov, AeyovTwv auTwv,
bzi 'l8ov Ss'VTsqov EvayyiXiov nsqt XqiaTov arjfialvov, '/at ov8a-
fiov dvwdsv Xiywv ttjv yivvrjatv dXXd cprjatv 'Ev tw 'loqSdvy
'/arfjXds Td nvsvfia in' amdv, xat cpiovfj' OhTog saTtv b vldg b
dyanijTdg, icp ov rjvSo'/rjaa. En-sis'^ de Tavza omwg sv Tolg
Toio'VTOtg dvo'fjiwg steXbIto, avayxa^ci to dytov nvBVfia, xat snt-
vvzTsi TOV dyiov ytov/dv, wg a^ro ^ddovg '/aTWTUTOv (xaTa) t^v
didvoiav zwv rjnaTrjfiivwv dvBviy/ai, xat Ta vno tijv dXXwv xa-
TaXsiipdivTa avdig ini^aXXeadat' 'iva fir rig twv nenXavrjfiivwv

EPIPHANIUS. 97
fjyrjasTai fivdw8cog amdv i'/cpqdaai Trjv yivvrjaiv. "ErcsiTa dvw-
cpsqfj Tdv }C6yov iqyd^STOf 8id de tijv dxqi§siav XsnTOfisqwg Tfjv
ndaav nqayfiaTEiav 8ii^Biai, '/at Big naqaGTaaiv dXrjd-Biag ifi-
ftdqTvqag zoig V7rrjqiTag tov Xoyov ysvofiivovg naqsiadysi, cpd-
ffxwv 'EnsiSfjnsq noXXot insysiqrjaav 'iva Tivdg fiiv iniyEiqrjzdg
SeI^jj, cprjfit 8i TOvg^nEqi Krjqivdov '/at Mrjqivdov, '/at Tovg aX
Xovg. Elra Tt cpqatv; "E8o^e '/dfiot xads^fjg naqrj'/oXovdrj'/oTt
dvwdsv TOtg avTonTaig xat vnrjqiTaig tov Xoyov ysvofiivoig, yqd
ipai aot, xqdziazs QsocpiXs' s'ltow tivi QeocpiXtii tote yqdcpcov
TOVTO sXsysv, 'fj navTi dvdqwncp Qsdv dyanwvTi. Ilsqi wv, cpqai,
'/azrjxfjdrjg ,Xdywv zfjv aacpaXsiav. Kat Tfjv fiiv '/az'qyrjaiv nqozs-
TayfiivTjv scpaa'/sv, wg rjdrj vnd dX'Xcov fisv •/E'/azrjyfjadai , ov/
dacpaXwg de naq' awwv fisfiadrj'/ivai. EiTa rfjv d'/qi^sidv cpq
ai v 'EyivETO iv fjfisqaig 'Hqw8ov tov ^aaiXicog, i^ icprjfisqiag
'yt(itd TOV dqyisqiwg 'isqE'vg zig ovofiazi Za'/,aqiag, xat yvvfj av-
Tov ix TCOV d'vyariqwv '.Aaqdv, -jj ovofia 'EXtad^ET. Kat aqyeraL
nqd TOV Mardaiov. '0 fiiv ydq Mazdaiog iafjfiavE Tqia'/ovzaszfj
xqovov an dq'/jfjg' 6 8i Mdq-/og zd fiszd zqid'/ovza STazzsv s'zq,
T-fjV iv Tip 'Ioq8dvrj ysvofiivqv iv dXrjdsiq nqayfiarsiav, bfioia tlTj
MaTdaiq) xat Tip ylov/^' 6 de Mazdaiog dnd zqia'/ovzaizovg
xqovov nqd zfjg iv Tip 'loq8dvjj '/at tov ^anTiafiarog nqayfiazsiag
Td Si-fjyrjfia snoislTO' ylov/dg 8i nqd tov yqovov tov avXXrjcpS^fj-
vai Tdv 2wTfjqa iv yaazqt, and 'e§ firjvcov zdv yqdvov i8fjXov, '/at
ivvia firjvwv ndXiv, '/at dXiywv fjfiEqwv Trjg avXX-qipBwg toU Kv
qiov dig stvai TOV 7r.dvTa xqdvov rqid/ovra tv erog xat inir/eiva.
. . . 'EvTSvdsv Xomdv rjv ipaviqioaig, 'ort tov fiiv Qsdv rjv vldg,
8id 8i TOV aniqfioTog zov '.A8dfi '/azd 8ha8oxfjv iv aaq/t naqe-
yivBzo. '.AXXd O'V/ sayov ndXiv cpwziajidv ol nsnXavqfiivoi. '.Av-
TiXsyov de Tip Xoycii, samovg nXavcovTsg 'vniq Tqv dXfjdsiav. "Ecpa-
a'/ov 8i, 'otl 'I8ov Tqizov EvayyiXiov to xoto .Aov/dv. Tovzo
ydq S7tBTqd7cq Tip ylov/d, 'nvTt xat amcp dnd tcov 'E^dofiff/ovra
8-vo TCOV 8iaa'/oqTciadivTwv int Tip tov 2cozfjqog Xdycj), 8id 8i
IlavXov TOV dyiov, ndXiv inava'/dfiipavTog 7iqdg Tdv K-vqiov, ini-
zqanivzog 8i a'VTOv '/r/qv^at Td svayyiXtov '/at xrjq'vzTei nqwTOV
iv z/aXfiaTict, -/at laXXicf, '/at iv 'iraXicf, xat Maxsdovicf. '.Aqxfj
de ev TJJ I 'aXXiq • cog '/at nsqi tivcov twv amov d'/oXovdwv Xiyst
EV Talg avTov '.EntOToXalg b amdg IlavXog' Kqia'/rjg, cprjaiv, iv
Tjj FaXXicc. Ov ydq iv tjj laXaTiijt, eSg Ttveg nXavqdivTsg vojii-
7

98 THE GOSPELS.
tovaiv, dXXd iv tjj laXXiq.^ TlXfjv int Td nqo'/sifisvov iXsvaofiai.
'.AvEviy/avTog ydq toi) ytov/d Tag yeveaXoyiag, and twv xarw
int Ta dvio, '/at cpddaavTog Trjv sjicpaatv noirjGaadai Tijg dvwdsv
TOV Qsov Xoyov naqovaiag, bfiov te avvacpdsvTog tjj ivadq'/qi
avTov olxovofiiq, 'iva dnoTqiiprjtat dnd tcov nBnXavrjfiivwv Tfjv
nXdvrjv ov/ ivsvorjaav. .did vazsqov dvay/dtBi to dyiov nvBVfia
Tdv 'icodvvrjv naqaiTOVfiBvov BvayyBXiaaadai 8t' BvXd^Biav, xat
TanEivocpqoavvrjv int Ty yrjqaXiq amov fjXi'/iq, fiSTd ettj ivevfj-
'/ovTa Trjg savTOv Cwfjg, fisTd T'fjv amov dnd T^g IldTfiov ind-
V080V, TTJV int KXavSiov ysvofiivrjv Kaiaaqog. Kat fiexd Ixavd
sTrj roll 8iaTqiipai amdv dnd Tfjg '.Aaiag, dvay/dtsTat i'/diadat
zd EvayyiXiov. Kat ov/ rjv amip %peta nsqt Trjg ivadqxov nqay
fiazsiag XsnzoXoyslv rj8i^ ydq rjacpdXiazo. '.AXXd tug '/aroniv ti
vcov ^aivwv, '/at bqdv amovg int Td Sfinqoadev b'vTag, xat ini
Ta Tqax'ineqa samovg i'/SsSw/orag , '/at nXdvag '/at d'/avddSrj,
dvcr/aXiaaa&at amovg sig sidElav b8ov nqovoovvzog, xat dacpa-
Xt^Oftivov intxrjqvxs'vaaadai amolg' xat Btns, Ti nXavdads, not
Tqinsads; noi nXavdadE KfjqivdB '/at 'E^iwv '/at ol dXXot; erf}'/
e'ffTtv oiVwg, wg vojiitsTE. Nat iyBvvrjdrj 6 XqtGTdg xaTa adq/a,
drjXov. 'I80V ydq avzdg bfioXoyd, oti '0 Xoyog adq^ iyivsTO.
'.AXXd fifj i^OTE iyivsTo adq§, vofiiarjcB tov uvtov sivai. Ovx
I'aTt ydq and xqdvwv Maqiag fiovov, wg S'/aaTog fjfiwv dcp' otov
ysvvaTat vndqxst ' nqtv 8i tov yEvvrjdfvat, ov/ stvat. 'O 8i dyiog
©eog .Adyog, vldg tov Qeov, Xqtazdg Kvqtog fjficov 'irjaovg, oi'/
soTiv dnd xQovwv Maqiag fiovov, ovze dnd XQ^vwv 'iwafjcp fio
vov, OVTE 'HXt, cwTS ylsvL, cnrzs Zoqo^d^sX, ovtb 2aXadifjX, oms
Nddav, crvTE Ja^t8, ovte dnd 'la'/co^, o'vzs dnd 'laadx, oms dnd
xqdvwv TOV '.A8dfi, o'ms Nwe, ovts '.A^qadfi, ome dnd T^g nifi-
7CTrjg fjfiiqag, oms dnd T^g TsrdqTqg fjfiiqag, o'me dnd T^g Tqi-
Trjg, OVTB and Trjg dsvriqag, owe i^drov ovqavdg '/at fj yrj ysyi-
vrjzai, OVTB i^oTOv 6 xdajiog' dXXd' 'Ev dqxy rjv 6 ^doyog, xat 0
Adyog rjv nqdg Tdv Qsdv '/.t.X.
'Iva and Tsaaaqwv svayysXtaTwv Tfjv ndaav xaTa' Te tijv adq'/a,
'/at xaTa ttjv deoTrjTO d/qi^eiav xaTdaxcofisv.
Haeres. II. c. 2. h. 69. See below under 'Gospel of John.'
« 2 Tim. iv. 10. The N. T. reading is Kpirjaxifi? e!? TaXoTtav. See however
Eus. H. E. III. 4, KpiaxT)? (iiv tii FaXXtav. Some read in Eusebius M Tas FaX-
Uai; and IkX ti^v FaXarJav is also found.

JEROME. 99
16. Jerome.^
Comment, in Mat. prooem. (T. IV. p. 2). Plures fuisse, qui
Evangelia scripserunt, et Lucas Evangehsta testatur, dicens:
" Quoniam quidem multi conati sunt ordinare narrationera rerura,
quae in nobis corapletae sunt, sicut tradiderunt nobis, qui ab
initio ipsi viderunt Serraonera, et rainistraverunt ei;" et perse-
verantia usque ad praesens terapus moniraenta declarant: quae
a diversis auctoribus edita, diversarum haereseon fuere principia,
ut est illud juxta .ffigyptios^ et Thomara,^ et Matthiara* et Bar-
tholomaeum,^ duodecira quoque apostolorura," et Basihdis' at
que Apellis,* ac reliquorum, ^ quos enumerare longissimuin est:
cura tantum in praesentiarum hoc necesse sit dicere: exstitisse
quosdam, qui sine spiritu et gratia Dei conati sunt magis ordi
nare narrationem, quam historiae texere veritatem. Quibus jure
potest illud propheticum coaptari: "Vae qui prophetant de corde
suo: qui ambulant post spiritum suura, qui dicunt: Haec dicit
Dominus : et Dominus non raisit eos. " De quibus et Salvator in
Evangelio Joannis loquitur : " Omnes qui ante me .venerunt, fures
et latrones fuerunt." Qui venerunt, non qui raissi sunt. Ipse
enira ait: "Veniebant, et ego non mittebara eos." In venienti-
bus, praesuraptio temeritatis: in missis, obsequium servitutis est.
Ecclesia autera, quae supra petram Domini voce fundata est,
quara introduxit rex in cubiculura suum, et ad quara per fora
men descensionis occultae misit manura suam, similis damulae
hinnuloque cervorum, quatuor fluraina paradisi instar eructans,
quatuor angulos et annulos habet, per quos quasi area Testa
menti et custos Legis Domini, lignis iramobilibus vehitur. Pri-

1 Born at Stride (Dalmatia) A.D. 329 : died at Bethlehem AD. 420.
' See Introduction ' Gospel of Egyptians ; ' and below for extracts from it.
' Gospel of Thomas, a well-known Apocryphal Gospel ; see Introduction
" Apoc. Gospels."
* Matthias, Eus. H. E. III. 25, says the Heretics circulated Gospels pretend
ing to he by Peter and Thomas and Matthias.
^ Bartholomew is said (Eus. H. E. V. 10) to have taken Matthew's Gospel
in Hebrew to India ('E^pataiv YpaiifJiaat Tinv tou MaTiafou YP^tpiiv), where Pan
taenus found it cherished by the Christians. See below.
* 'Twelve Apostles:' another name for 'Gospel of the Hebrews.'
' Basilides: see Introduction.
' Apelles: said to have been the author of an Apocryphal Gospel.
' See Introduction 'Apoc. Gospels,' 7*

100 THE GOSPELS.
raus omnium est Matthaeus publicanus, cognomento Levi, qui
Evangelium in Judaea Hebraeo sermone edidit, ob eorum vel'
maxime causam, qui in Jesum crediderant ex Judaeis, et nequa
quam Legis umbrara, succedente Evangelii veritate, servabant.
Secundus Marcus, interpres apostoli Petri, et Alexandrinae ec
clesiae priraus episcopus, qui Dominum quidem Salvatorem ipse
non vidit, sed ea, quae magistrura audierat praedicantera, juxta
fidem magis gestorum narravit, quam ordinem. ^ " Tertiys Lucas
medicus, natione Syrus Antiochensis (cujus laus in evangelio)
qui et ipse discipulus apostoli Pauli, in Achaiae, Boeotiaeque
partibus volumen condidit, quaedam altius repetens, et ut ipse
in prooemio confitetur, audita magis quam visa describens. Ul
timus Joannes apostolus et evangelista, quem Jesus amavit plu
rimum, qui supra pectus Domini recumbens, purissima doctrina-
rura fluenta potavit, et qui solus de cruce raeruit audire : " Ecce
mater tua." Is cum esset in Asia, et jam tunc haereticorum
seraina pullularent, Cerinthi, Ebionis, et ceterorum qui negant
Christum in carne venisse (quos et ipse in epistola sua Anti
christos vocat, et apostolus Paulus frequenter percutit) coactus
est ab omnibus pene tunc Asiae episcopis et multarum eccle
siarum legationibus, de divinitate Salvatoris altius scribere, et
ad ipsum (ut ita dicara) Dei Verbura, non tam audaci, quam
felici temeritate prorumpere. Unde et ecclesiastica narrat histo
ria, cura a fratribus cogeretur ut scriberet, ita facturura se re-
spondisse, si indicto jejunio in commune omnes Deum depreca-
rentur: quo expleto, revela tione saturatus, in illud prooemium e
coelo veniens eructavit: "In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum
erat apud Deura, et Deus erat Verbura; hoc erat in principio
apud Deura." Haec igitur quatuor Evangelia multo ante prae
dicta, Ezechiehs quoque volumen probat, in quo prima Visio ita
contexitur: "Et in medio sicut simihtudo quatuor aniraaliura : et
vultus eorum fades hominis, et fades leonis, et fades vituli, et
fades aquilae." Prima hominis fades Matthaeum significat, qui
quasi de homine exorsus est scribere: "Liber generationis Jesu
Christi, filii David, filii Abraham." Secunda Marcum, in quo
vox leonis in eremo rugientis auditur: "Vox clamantis in deserto,
'» Compare Papias: ou [a^vtoi Tagsi (p. 56); and for what follows see Mu
ratorian Fragment (p. 5).

JEROME. 101
parate viara Doraini, rectas facite semitas ejus." Tertia vituli,
quae evangelistara Lucara a Zacharia sacerdote sumpsisse initium
praefigurat. Quarta Joannem evangeliatam, qui assumptis pennis
aquilae, et ad altiora festinans, de verbo Dei disputat. Caetera
quae sequuntur, in eundem sensum proficiunt. Crura eorura recta,
et pennati pedes, et quocunque ibat spiritus, ibant, et non re-
vertebantur: et dorsa eorura plena oculis, et scintillae ac lara-
pades in raedio discurrentes, et rota in rota, et in singulis qua
tuor fades. Unde et Apocalypsis Joannis, post expositionera vi
ginta quatuor seniorura, qui tenentes citharas ac phialas, adorant
Agnum Dei, introducit fulgura, et tonitrua, et septem spiritus
discurrentes, et mare vitreum, et quatuor animalia plena oculis,
dicens: "Animal priraura simile leoni: et secundum simile vitulo :
et tertium simile horaini: et quartum simile aquilae volanti."
Et post paululum: "Plena erant," inquit, "ocuhs, et requiem non
habebant die ac nocte, dicentia: Sanctus, sanctus, sanctus Domi
nus Deus oranipotens, qui erat, et qui est, et qui venturus est."
Quibus cunctis perspicue ostenditur, quatuor tantura debere
Evangelia suscipi, et omnes Apocryphorum naenias raortuis raagis
haereticis, quam ecclesiasticis vivis canendas.
Praefat'io in IV. Evang. ad Damas. Igitur haec praesens
praefatiuncula pollicetur, quatuor tantum Evangelia, quorura ordo
est iste: Matthaeus, Marcus, Lucas et Joannes, codicum Graeco-
rum emendata collatione, sed et veterum: nec quae multura a
lectionis Latinae cousuetudine discreparent.
[Note. On the nature of the testimony to our Gospels to be drawn from
the Apocryphal Gospels, &c., see Introduction; and for illustrations see the
last part of this work.]

102

V.
THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS AND THE SYNOPTISTS.
1. Barnabas.^
C. 4. 3. Td TiXeiov axdv8aXov 'r^yt'xs, nsqt ov ysyqanzai,
cog 'Evwy Xiyst, elg zdvzo ydq b Ssanozrjg avvTiTfiijxs Tovg '/ai
qovg xat Tag fjfiiqag, 'iva Taxvvy 6 rjyanrjfiivog amov xat int
zfjv xXr^qovofiiav 'rj^y.^ (Compare Mat. xxiv. 6, 22; Mark xiii. 7.)
C. 4. 14. 'jEti de '/d'/slvo, dSsXcpoi fiov, vosIts' otov ^Xi-
nrjTB fiSTd TrjXt'/ama arjftsla '/at TiqaTa to ysyovoTa iv Tip laqaf/X,
'/at omwg iy'/aTaXsXslipdat avzovg, nqoaiywfisv frqnozs, wg ys
yqanzai, noXXot xXrjTot, dXiyot 8s i'/Xs'/Tot evqBdwfisv.^
(Mat. (XX. 16?); xxii. 14).
C. 5. 9. "Ote 8s Tovg idt'otg dnoazdXovg Tovg fiiXXovzag '/rj-
q'vaastv to svayyiXtov amov s^sXi^aTo, 'dvzag vniq ndaav dfiaq
Tiav avofiwTiqovg, Iva Ssi^y 'oti ov'/ rjXd-Ev '/aXsaat 8t-
' The following citations from Barnabas are of uncertain value, mainly be
cause of the uncertain age of the Epistle, and because of the divergences in the
MSS of the text. Bnt it is more natural to account for the form of the quota
tions by supposing Barnabas to have had at least Matthew and possibly Luke
in his hands, than to suppose in each case that he was referring to some (non-
extant) Apocryphal hook. See Introduction on ' Barnabas. '
* The Latin reads ^^ Sicut Daniel dicit." The words are uot in Enoch as we
have it. Hilg. refers (but the reference is forced) to "Enoch Ixxxix. 61, &c., xc.
17;" see also Sup. Rei. I. 237. For auvT^Tjj,if)x£v compare Dan.'ix. 24. We cannot
find more than correspondence of idea between the passage and the Synoptists.
Even if the passage be suggested by Enoch, it is doubtful whether the si? touto
Yap X.T.X. belong to it. Hilg. points X^Y^'- (so as to stop the reference).
3 This passage is preceded by a warning against sleeping in sin lest the
wicked potentate should have power to exclude us from the kingdom of the
Lord. There is a possible allusion to Mat. xxv. 5, &c., but not so clear as to in
duce us to quote. In our text the phrase oS? Y^YP^'ifat is remarkable, as the
first quotation from our Lord's words with similar reference to the written record.
His words ave often quoted, but not as from Scripture. To deny, as some do,
that these words are from Matthew's Gospel which we have in our hands, and to
ascribe them to the lost Greek of 4 Ezra viii. 3 (of which the Latin is Nam multi
creati sunt, pauci autem saivabuntwr), is surely an extraordinary proceeding. The
same word Y'VPontToi occurs in the previously quoted passage, c. 4, 3; but whether
or how far in reference to Enoch is really doubtful. But the fact that it does
occur may make us hesitate to found more upon it here than that it proves Bar
nabas to be quoting from Matthew as a written record of our Lord's sayings.

BARNABAS. 103
'/aiovg dXXd dfiaqzwXovg, toze icpaviqwasv savzdv sivat v'ldv
Qbov.^ (Compare Mat. ix. 13.)
C. 5. 12. yliyst ydq b Qsdg Trjv nXrjyfjv Tfjg aaq'/dg amov,
ozi i^ amdv.' "OTav noTd^wat tov notfiiva avTiov, tots
dnoXslTat Td nqo^aTU Trjg noifivrjg.^ (Compare Mat.
xxvi. 31.)
C. 7. 11. OvTW, cprjatv, ol diXovzig fis 18b1v, xat dxpaad-at
fiov Trjg ^aaiXBiag, ocpBiXovat d-Xi^svTsg '/at naddvTsg Xa^slv fis.^
(Compare Mat. xvi. 24.)
C. 12. 11. 'Enst ovv fiiXXovat Xiysiv oti X^iffTog I'tog JaviS
ianv, amdg nqocprjusiiEt zlavt8, cpo^ovfiBvog '/at avviwv Tfjv 7rXd-
vqv Ttuv dfiaqTwXwv Einsv Kvqiog Tip livqiij) fiov Kddov ex
de^twv ^(01' ewg dv dd TOvg ixdqo-vg aov vnond8iov tc5v no8dv
aov. Kat ndXiv XiysL omcog 'Haa'i'ag' Eins K'vqtog Tip Xqianp
fiov Kvqii^, oi) i'/qdrrjaa Tr/g 8s^idg amov ina'/ovaai sfinqoadev
amov s'dvrj, '/at layvv ^aatXiwv 8ia^qfj^w. "I8e ncog Javt8 Xiysi
avzdv Kvqiov /at vldv oi Xiyet.'' (Compare Mat. xxii. 45.)
C. 15. 8. niqag yi toi Xiyet aiTolg' Tdg vsofirjviag hficov
xat Ta ffa/J/JaTa ov/ dvsxofiai. 'Oqars nwg XiyEi' Ov rd vvv
ad§§aTa iiiot dexTa, dXXd o nsnoirj'/a, iv cp '/azanavaag zd
* Cod. K and I (Bryennios) and old Latin agree in the reading. The com
mon text added eE; (JtErdvoiav after djJiapTuXou;. This same quotation appears
2 Clem. c. 2. 4, with the preface STE'pa Se YP'"?'"! Xeyei oti. See also Justin, Apol.
I. c. 15, where we have it with the addition of eE; [jiETavotav and the preface eI-£
81 ouTto;. Origen cont. Cels. I. 63 defends the character of the Apostles against
the charges which Celsus had advanced, founding probably, as Origen thinks, on
this expression "in the Catholic Epistle of Barnabas." Christ's saying maij have
been preserved in some "original Spruch-Sammlung," or in "many other works"
as some say — it is impossible to disprove such hypotheses — but as a matter of fact
we have it in St. Matthew.
^ The old Greek text had axopKtaSTJaETOi. This is also found in a correction
of *•¦ The old Latin was peculiar: "Dicit autem Esaias Ptaga corporis Ulius
omnss sanati sumus, et alius propheta Feriam pastorem et dispargentur oves gregis. "
Compare Isaiah liii. 5 ; Zech. xiii. 7. Bryennios's MS reads d:toXEiTat.
" Those words do not occur in any extant Gospel, canonical or apocryphal.
Neither can they be referred to 4 Ezra vii. 14 (Hilg). The words in 4 Ezra are:
Si ergo non ingredientes ingressi jfuerint qui vivwnt angusta et mala haec, -non pote
runt recipere quae sunt reposita. Compare Mat. xvi. 24 and Acts xiv. 22, which
furnish a basis for the saying.
' This passage is a reference to the 0. T. Although it cannot be pressed as
coming through the canonical Gospel, the short comment of Barnabas upon it
naturally suggests that he took his interpretation of the Psalm from our Lord's
words in St. Matthew. The readings in the whole passage vary. It is usually
printed xa\ ulov ©ecu. But s and Bryennios's MS, with the Latin, support the
text as above.

104 THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS AND THE SYNOPTISTS.
ndvTa dqxfjv fjfiiqag 6y86rjg noirjaio, o effTtv a^^OD '/dofiov aqyrj.
Jid '/at dyofisv ttjv fjfiiqav ttjv dyddrjv sig evcpqoGiJvqv, iv y '/at
d 'irjOcwg dvsazrj ix vs'/qwv '/at cpavsqwdstg dvi^rj sig ovqavovg.^
(Compare Mark xvi. 14, &c.; Luke xxiv. 51 ; and on the other hand
Mat. xxviii. 10; Acts i. 3.)
C. 19. 11. JTavTt [Tt^ aiTovvTi as 8i8ov.^ (Compare Mat.
V. 42; Luke vi. 30.)
2. Clement of Rome.
First Epistle.
C. 13.1 TansLvocpqovfjawfiSv ovv, d8EXcpot, dnodifisvoi ndaav
dXatovsiav '/at TVipov xat dcpqoavvrjv '/at oqydg '/ai noirjawfiev
Td yeyqofifiivov — XiyEt ydq to nvEVfia Td dyiov (Jer. ix. 23)" Mrj
'/avydadw b aocpdg iv tjj aoq>icje airov firjdi b laxvqdg iv tjj
^ This passage is cited here because it has been used by Hilgenfeld (Bar
nabas, p. 118) and Reuss (Gesch. § 234) to show that 'Barnabas' was written in
the first century, before the exclusive authority of "our Gospels" was established.
It appears to contradict them all (says Reuss) save the third. But in that case Acts
contradicts Luke, and the truth is that to group the Resurrection and Ascension
together is quite consistent with fuller accounts which detail miraculous appear
ances between. Besides there is indefinite time in cpav£ptol3£ts.
^ These words are in the common Greek Text and in the Sinaitic corrector's
text (seventh century), following the words Ovi SioTaaEt; doOvat, ou8£ 6i6ou; y°Y'
YUOEi?. They are omitted in N primd manu and in I (Bryennios's MS). The
Old Latin wants chapters 18-21, so that we cannot appeal to it. Gebhardt omits
the words, now also Hilg. (1877).
' This passage begins with Jeremiah and ends with Isaiah, the first quota
tion being in words suggested hy 1 Cor. i. 31 (2 Cor. x. 17, see also 1 Kings
ii. 10) ; and its main passage is an abridgment or echo of passages from the
Sermon on the Mount. There is no doubt that the only difficulty in believing
that Clement consciously abridged Matthew or Luke lies in the " unusual length
and roundness and compactness" of the passage. But if we allow that he was
writing from memory (which is possible), and if he was accumulating precepts to
enjoin lowly-mindedness because of the retribution which awaits harsh judgments
and self-rigliteousness (which is certain), this difficulty is in great measure removed.
It is worth while to compare Polycarp's form of quotation of the same passage
(see below page 112)) and Justin's )(^pi()aTo\ Kal oiKTipfAOVE? Apol. I. 15; Dial. 96.
Those who will have Clement to be quoting some " well-known record " (which
is not our Canonical Gospels), and who will have it to be " careful and precise
quotation of the very words," need to have another well-known source for Poly
carp, and at least two others for Justin, who (as usual) is not verbally consistent
with himself They have to meet also the fact that those "very words" are not
found in any extant Gospel. The clause XP^<''^£>'SaSE x.t.X. is uot in our Gos
pels, though it suggests Justin's words. The order of the clauses varies in the
MSS, u (lE'tpu fiETpElTE X.T.X. being in Bryennios's MS put before the two pre
cepts which immediately precede it in our text.

CLEMENT OF ROME. 105
laxv'i avzov, firjdi 6 nXovatog iv Tip nXomij) airov, dXX' 'fj 6 '/av-
XCOfiEvog iv Kvqiii) xavxaadco tov i'/^r]TEiv avTdv '/at noulv '/qifia
'/at dt'/aLoa-vvrjv — fidXtOTO fiBfivrjfiivot tcDv ^oywv tov Kvqiov
Irjaov, ovg iXdXrias 8i8dGxcov inisi'/eiav '/at fiaxqodvfiiav. O'v-
TWg ydq BinEV 'EXsbIte tva iXBrjdfJTB; dcpisTS 'iva dcpsdjj vfilv
wg noislTs, omco noirjdfjaBTat vfilv cog 8i8nTE ovrco 8od'fjaBTat
Vfilv (5g '/qivETE OVTW ¦/qidfjasads' wg xq^^OTSVEads omwg xQrj-
aTSvdfjasTai vfilv Cjj fiSTqcji fisTqslTS, EV aiTcp fiSTqrjdfjasTai vfilv.
TavTy TJJ svToXjj '/at Tolg naqayyiXfiaai Tomoig aTrjqi^wfisv sav-
Tovg sig Td naqsioEadai vnrp/dovg 'dvTag Tolg dytonqsniai Xoyoig
avTov, TanstvocpqovovvTsg (Mat. V. 7; vi. 14; vii. 1, 2; Luke vi.
31, 37 &c.), cprjat ydq b dytog Xoyog' 'Ent Tiva ini^Xixpco, dXX'
-Tj int Tdv nqcivv XAxt fja'vxtov '/at Tqifiovzd fiov rd Xdyia; (Is.
Ixvi. 2.)
C. 15. 1. Toivvv '/oXXrjdwfisv Tolg ust' svas^siag slqrjvsvov-
aiv, xat fifj TOtg fisd' vnoxqiaswg §ovXofiivoig slqfjvqv. Aiyst
ydq nov' OvTog 6 Xadg TOig x^iXsaiv fis Ttfi^, fj de '/aq8ia aii-
Tcov nd^qco dnsaTiv an sfiov.^
C. 46. Mvrjad-rjzE zdv Xoywv 'Irjadv tov Kvqiov fjficov. Ei
nsv ydq' Ovat Tip dvdqdnqt ixsivcj)' xaXdv rjv aiTcp sl
ovx iysvvfji^rj, 'fj sva Ttiiv exxAexTwv fiov axavdaXiaai'
'/qslTTOv rjv aiTcp nsqiTsdyvuL fiijXov, '/at '/OTanov-
Tiadrjvat sig T'fjv d-dXaaaav, 'rj 'sva twv fii'/qcov fiov
axavdaXiaai.^ (Compare Mat. xxvi. 24, xviii. 6; Mark ix. 42;
Luke xvii. 2, &c.)
' This reference is to Isaiah xxix. 13 ; but the author does not seem to re
member the original, and what he quotes is the peculiar form in Mark vii. 6.
The text of the LXX is iyyii^zi y.o: 6 Xao; outo; £v tu OTojAaTt auToO xa\ h
TOic x^'^^<"^ auTUv Tt(iua£v [jie. (See this more nearly reproduced in Mat. xv. 8.)
The form of Clement is exactly that of Mark, save that he has aTCEOTtv for aitE'-
fti. See the similar quotation of Jeremiah through St Paul in 1 Clem. c. 13
(quoted above). See also the almost identical form in 2 Clem. u. 3, the only
change heing o Xao? OUTOC.
' On the whole this passage does not give grounds for asserting that its
author used our canonical Gospels ; but it is not inconsistent with the supposi
tion that he did. His variations from them all are not greater than those of
Mark and Luke from each other. Compare Clem. Alex. Strom. III. 18. p. 561:
Dual TU ovSpuKu ^xeIvu, (pif)alv d Kupto; , xaXov njv auTUEt (ii) ^y^vvijStq, i]
Eva TUV £xXexTuv (Jiou oxavSaXitrat (Mat. xxvi. 24), xpstTTOv tjv aviTU TtEpiTESiiva'.
[AuXov xai xaraTtovTioS^vat ei; SoiXaoaav rj £va tuv ^xXextcov (aou StaarpEiljai
(Mat. xviii. 6). And Hom. XII. 29 "O x-fji aXitjSEia; irpoqjiQTiri; E((i-r\' Ta aYaUd
^XSeiv Sei, (xaxdipioc 6k, tpiQCTlv, 8i' ou I'px^ETai. "Ofioiu; xat ra xaxd avaYXY)
^X^eiv, oual 61; Si' ou ^p^ETai. These are iilustrations of the freedom of quota-

106 THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS AND THE SYNOPTISTS.
C. 58. 2. 7% ydq b Qsdg '/at tjj b Kvqtog 'lyadvg Xqtazdg
'/at TO nvErjfia to a'ytov y te niGTig '/at y sXntg Tdv i'/Xs'/Turv,
OTi 0 notyaag iv Tansivocpqoavvjj jiet' sxTsvovg inisr/siag djie-
TafisXr'jtwg Ta vnd tov Qsov dsSojiiva 8i'/aiwfiaTa y-at nqoOTay-
fioTa ovTog nqoOTBTayfiivog '/at iXXoytfiog earat sig Tdv aqid-fidv
Tdv aw^ofisvwv 8td 'lyaov XqiOTOv, 8i' ov effTiv avTip fj 8d^a
sig Tovg aldvag twv aldvwv. 'Afirjv. (Mat. xxviii. 19; 2 Cor.
xhi. 13; Rom, xi. 29.) Second Epistle.'^
A. CITATIONS WHICH MAY BE TAKEN AS AGEEEING WITH THE
STNOPTISTS.
C. 2. 4. Kat ETsqa 8i yqacpfj Xiysi oti Ovx rjXdov '/aXi-
aai 8txaiovg dXXd dfiaqzwXovg.'^ (Mat. ix. 13; Mark ii. 17.)
C. 3. 2. .Aiyst 8i '/at aiTog' Tdv bfioXoyfjOavTa fie
ivdniov Tdv dvdqdnwv, bfioXoyfjaw avTdv ivdntov
TOV noTqdg fiov.^ (Mat. x. 32.)
C. 4. 2. yLsyst ydq' Oi ndg 6 Xsywv fiot Kvqte, Kv-
qie, awdyGBTat, dXX' 6 noiwv ryv dixatoavvrjv. (Mat. vii. 21.)
C. 6. 1. yiiyEi 8i b K'vqtog' Ovdetg olxsTyg S-vvarai
8vat '/vqiotg 8ovXe-veiv. 'Eav yjislg dsXwfisv xat 0e^ 8ov-
Xsvstv '/at fiafiwvd, davficpoqov fjfilv effTtv. Ti ydq Td ocpsXog,
idv Ttg Tdv xoajiov oXov '/sqdfjay, tiJv de xjjvx'^'i' ^q-
fitcodjj;^ (Luke xvi. 13; Mat. xvi. 26.)
C. 9. 11. Kat ydq slnsv 6 Kvqtog' 'A8sXcpoi fiov ovToi
etfftv ol notovvTsg Td diXyfia tov noTqdg ftov.^ (Mat.
xii. 50.)
C. 13. 4. "Ozav ydq dxovawat naq' fjjidv oti Xsyei b ©eo'g"
Oi x«'?tS Vfilv el dyanoTE Tovg dyandvTugvfidg, dXXd
tion. Tertullian says that Marcion had (Luke xvii) expedisse ei si natus m)n fuisset
of the author of offences. See also Origen, Com. in Num. XXV. 1.
• This work, now complete iu the MS published by Bryennios, is clearly a
Homily of early date. As to its age and characteristics see Introduction.
* See before, page 103 note on Barn. c. 5. 9.
^ Though this is not verbatim, it is as near to a verbal quotation as
preachers in our own day can be depended upon to give.
* The first sentence — the avowed quotation — is Luke xvi. 13 verbatim (com
pare Mat. vi. 24 where oixE'TV); is wanting) ; the third sentence is not verbatim, but
resembles Matthew's Tt Y^^P u9EX£iTai av3puito;, ia.t tov xo'ojjiov oXov XEpSiiot),
Ti^v 6k >l>uxi)v auToii Sk)ijhu3i() ;
5 See note (3).

CLEMENT OP ROME. 107
yaqig vfiiv sl dyanaTS Tovg iydqovg 'xat Tovg fiiaovv-
Tag Vfidg. (Luke vi. 32 &c.)
C. 17. 5. liCai oxpovTut TTJV dd^av aiTov xat to x^cTog ot
ttTTiffToi. (Mat. xxiv. 50.)
B. CITATIONS WHIOH CANNOT BE EEGAEDED AS AGREEING WITH
THB SYNOPTISTS.
C. 4. 5. Etnsv b K-vqtog' 'Edv rjce jibt ifiov avvrjyfiivot iv
Tip) '/dXncj) fiov '/at fifj notfjcs Tag ivroXdg fiov, dno^aXd vjtdg
'/at sqw Vfilv 'YndysTB an' ifiov, ov/ oi8a vfidg nodEv iaTi,
sqydTat dvofdag.^
C. 5. 2-4. My cpo^yddfisv s^sXdBlv ex toi; xdofiov tovtov.
Aiyst ydq b Kvqtog' "Easads wg dqvia sv fiiacji Xv/wv. 'Ano
'/qidstg 8i b Tlirqog avzip Xiysi' 'Edv ovv Staanaqd^waiv pi Xv-
'/ot Td dqvia; Elnsv b 'irjaovg Tip IliTqc^' My cpo^siadwaav rd
aqvia TOvg Xv'/ovg fiSTd Td dnodavslv avTd' xat vfislg ftfj cpo-
jislads TOvg ano'/TivovTog vfidg '/at fiydiv vfilv 8vvafisvovg rcotslv,
dXXd cpo^elade rdv fieTd rd dnodavslv vfidg syfivra i^ovaiav ipv-
xqg '/at awfioTog tov ^aXslv sig yiswav nvqog.'' (Compare Luke
X. 3; Mat. x. 16; Luke xii. 4; Mat. x. 28.)
C. 8. 5. Aiyet ydq 6 Kvqtog iv Tcp eiayyeXicji' El to fit-
'/qdv ovx STTjqfjaaTe, to fiiya Tig vfiiv ddaei; Xiyw ydq vjilv
OTt 6 niazdg iv iXaxiazcp xat ev noXX^i nioTog effTtv. "Aqa ovv
TOVTO Xiyst' TqqfjaaTE ttjv adqxa dyvfjv xat Tfjv acpqaylda dant-
Xov, iva Trjv aldviov Kwfjv dnoXd^wfisv.^ (Compare Luke xvi. 10;
Mat. xxv. 21.)

* This seems to justify the remark of Photius about our Ep. IlXiiiv otc priTa
Ttvo (ii; aito Tif)C 'ida.i yP""?')?' ^evt^ovTa TCapeioaYet, uv o\J6' uj irpuTiQ aicifiX-
XaxTO TcavTeXu;. It is usually supposed that this is from the Gospel of the
Egyptians. See below, quotation from c. 12, and Introduction.
' The Synoptic passages to which reference is made give the substance and
many of the phrases of this quotation ; but the narrative portion indicates another
source. The 'Gospel of the Egyptians' is again conjectured. See Clem. Hom.
XVII. 5 and Just. Apol. I. c. 19 for similar passages, but with the usual variations.
Both for example have (aiq 6uvd{JiEvo; ti noiijaot; Justin has (like Clement) [jiETa to
ttTioiJavEiv and (like Luke) has not Ttupo; after ye'evvov which the Homily has; while
the Hom. has Tifi 8£ 'I'^XV !^^ SuvanEvou ti itoiiiidat which reminds us of Matthew's
Tiqv 6k 4»'X''l^ y-V SuvajAEVUV aTtoxTSivat. So far as those variations go they are
not greater than those between the Synoptists ; but thc narrative is irreconcilable
with the idea that the passage comes from a Canonical source.
8 The form apa ouv is probably (as Hilg. conjectures) an explanation. Scppa-

108 THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS AND THE SYNOPTISTS.
C. 12. 2. 'EnsqwTrjdstg ydq airdg 6 K'vqtog vnd ztvog noze
fj^st avTov fj ^aaiXsia,^ Einsv "OTav s'aTat Td 8'vo sv, '/at zd
e'^w wg TO e'ffw, xat to dqasv fiSTd Trjg d-rjXsiag, ckts dqasv ovte
dfjXv.'"'
3. Hermas.^
Vis. II. 2. 8. Maxdqioi vfislg oaot oi'/ dqvrjaovrai ti)v ^w^v
avTwv. "Qfioasv ydq K-vqtog xaTd tov vlov avzov Toig aqvqaafii-
vovg TOV Kvqiov airwv dnsyvwqiadat dnd Tfjg t^wfjg avTWv, Tovg
v'vv fiiXXovTag dqvsiadat ralg iqxofiivaig fjfiiqaig' Tolg 8i nqo-
Tiqov dqvyaafiEVOig , 8 id rfjv noXvanXayxviav 'iXscog iyivSTO av
Tolg.^ (Mat. X. 32. 33 and xxlv. 21.)
Vis. III. 6. 5. Owot etfftv e^ovreg ^wev niariv, eyovTsg 8i '/at
nXovTov zov alwvog tovtov. "OTav yivrjzat d-Xliptg, 8id Tdv nXov-
Tov avTwv xat did Tag nqayfiOTsiag dnaqvovvTat tov Kvqiov ai-
Twv. /£at dnoxqidstg avTjj Xiyw ' Kvqia, noTS ovv svyqyaTOi s'aov
Tat sig TfjV ol'/o8ofifjv ; "Ozav, cpyatv, neqt'/ony avTwv 6 TT^OOTog
Y(; = Baptism. See Hermas, Sim. VIII. 6. But Eus. H. E. VI. 43, makes it =
confirmation hy the Bishop. This is recorded in connection with Novatus about
the middle of the third century.
° Clem. Alex, .Strom, III, 13. p. 553 says that the inquiry was by Salome
tco'te Y''ucr3ifi(j£T0t ra TCspl <ov ¦qpero , and that the Lord said : "Orav ouv to ttJ;
aiaxuvK); ?v8u|jia TCaTYiaYiTe, xai oTav fV)-c\Ta.i Ta 8uo Ev, xai to ajJ^sv (iETa Ti);
S>T)XEto; OUTE otfi^sv OUTE bifiXu. He says that the words are from tlie ' Gospel of
the Egyptians,' Here, as elsewhere, the want of verbal correspondence between
the two quotations of (presumably) the same passage is to he noted.
'» The author quotes (c, 11, 2) an unknown passage as o' TCpoqjijTtxo; Xd'yo?"
TaXatTCUpoi siutv ol 6(>jju)(°^ x.t.X. In 1 Clem. 23. 3 there is tlie same passage
TaXaticupoi x.t.X. introduced by the words rj Ypaipi) auTT); hut the usual Patristic
inaccuracy of citation is apparent on comparing the two forms of what is not
withstanding the same passage. Not only is there 6taTaSovTE; rj] iliujcj) in one
case and 6taTa?ovTES tr\ xap6(a in the other, and other similar minor variations;
but in 1 Clem, the words of an important clause are i8ou Y^YiOpaxapiEv xai ou6ev
TOUTUV aujxps'pijXEv , while in 2 Clem, the clause runs •f^\^.ti^ 6k ijjA^pav £|
Yjn^pai; TCpoa8Ex6(ji,£voi ou8kv toutuv kupaxajXEV, See in the extracts from Justin,
and Introduction (' Justin ' and ' Clement ') further proofs of this habitual loose
ness of citation, and its bearing on the assumption so often made that when
two forms of citation of a Gospel occur in some ancient Christian writing they
cannot both be from a Canonical source. See how our author (c. 13, 2) witli
X^Y^' "i^? 0 Kuptos introduces a citation of Isaiah lii, 5, and goes on to give some
pointed clauses which are not in our Scripture,
• See Introduction, The text is from Gebhardt and Harnack.
2 This is only an echo, if it be even that. It is fainter in the Greek and
the corrected Latin than it was in the Vulgate Latin, though even there faint
enough.

HERMAS. 109
6 xpvyaywydv aiTOvg, tote sv/qyaToi saovrai Tip Qsip. (Mat.
xiii. 21,22; xix. 21.)
Vis. III. 9. 5. BXinsTE Tfjv '/qiaiv ttjv snsqyofiivyv. Ol
vnsqi'xovTsg ovv ixCrjcslTS TOvg 7tEivdvTag ewg oi;Vw 6 7ivqyog
ETsXiadq' fiETo ydq to TsXsadrjvat Tdv nvqyov dsXyasTS dyado-
noislv, xat oiy s^szs zdnov. (Luke xiii. 24 &c.)
Vis. III. 9. 7. iViiv ovv Vfilv Xiyw Tolg nqoyyovfiivoig Tfjg
i'/'/Xrjaiag '/at Tolg nqwTO'/adsdqiTaig' fiy yivsads ofioioi rolg
cpaqfia'/olg. (Mat. xxiii. 6, but see afterwards under 'Hebrews'
for the bearing of this passage.) Compare Mand. XI. 12.
Vis. IV. 2. 6. Ovat Totg dxovaaaiv Td ^fjftaza zama xat
rcaqa'/ovaaaiv alqsTWTsqov rjv avzolg zd fifj ysvvydyvai. (Mat.
xxvi. 24 and parallel passages.)
Mand. I. 1. IlqcoTov ndvTwv nioTsvaov 'oti sig iaziv b Qsdg,
o Ta ndvTO XTt'oag xat 'zaTaqTiaag, '/at noffjaag ex tov fifj 'ovzog
sig rd sivat rd ndvTa, xai ndvza ycoqwv, fidvog de dxwqrjzog wv. ^
Mand. IV. 1. 1. 'EvTiXXofiai aoi, cpyatv, cpvXdaasiv ryv dyvsiav
'/at fifj dva^aiviTW aov int Tfjv '/aq8iav nsqt yvvai'/dg dXXoTqiag,
'fj ni^t noqvsiag Tivdg, rj nsqt towvtwv bfioiwfidrwv novyqcov.
Tomo ydq noiwv fisydXyv dfiaqTiav iqyd^y. (Mat. v. 28.)
Mand. IV. 1. 6. Ti ovv, cprjfit, Kvqis, notfjay b dvfjq, idv
inifisivy Tip nddst tovzcj) fj yvvfj; 'AnoXvadzw, cprjatv, avTyv, '/at
o avfjq icp savTip fisviTW idv 8i dnoXvaag Trp) yvv,al'/a miqav
yafifjay, xat aiTdg fiotxarat.^ (Mat. v. 32; Luke xvi. 18; 1 Cor.
vii. 11.)
Mand. IX. 8. 2v ovv fifj dtaXinyg a'tTovftsvog Td a'lTyfia Trjg
ipvxyg aov, '/at Xqipy avTo. Edv 8s sx'/a'/fjayg '/at 8iipvxrjayg
a'lTO'Vfisvog , asavTov oItiw xat fiy tov 8t86vTa aot. (Luke xviii. 1.
Compare also 2 Cor. iv. 1 ; 2 Thess. iii. 13 &c.)
Mand. XII. 6. 3. 'A'/ovaoTS ovv jiov, '/at cpo^ifj&rjzE Tdv ndvza
8vvdfiEvov, adaat xat anoXiaat, xat zyqslTs Tag ivToXdg Tavzag,
xat tyasadE Tip Qscp. (Mat. x. 28.) See also Mand. VIL
¦> This is the passage quoted by Irenaeus IV. 20. 2. with such approval :
xaXu; ouv eItcev -ti YP'^'V^ ¦>! XEYOuaa • itpuTov navTUv tcioteuoov x.t.X. See Eus.
H. E. V. 8, where speaking of Irenaeus he says: Ou |ji6vov 8k oISev, aXXa xai
aitoSE'xETOi, Tiiv tou Tcot[jLE'vos tpatf-ffi, Xlytii-^ X.T.X.. It may refer to 1 Cor, i, 28.
^ The sin referred to is that of » Christian husband whose (Christian) wife
is guilty of adultery. He is to receive her hack if she repents, and not to marry
again lest he take away from her the occasion of repentance. This is to hold
good for one occasion.

110 THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS AND THE SYNOPTISTS.
Sim. V. 6. 1.5 "Axovs cpqaiv elg dovXov Tqonov [ov] xeiTai
0 vldg TOV Qeov, dXX' elg i^ovaiav fieydXyv '/eiTOt '/at '/vqidrrjca.
(Mat. xxviii. 18.)
Sim. VIII. 3. 1. -^e'yw onyzCj) ' Kvqte, Td 8iv8qov tovto yvco-
qiaov fiot ri ioTiV dnoqovfiat ydq nsqt avrov, ozt Toaovnov
'/Xd8wv '/onivTWV vytig effTi to 8iv8qov '/at ov8iv cpaivsTat xe-
'/ofifiivov an' aiTOv' iv tovtcij ovv dnoqovfiai. "A'/ovs cpyar Td
8iv8qov TOVTO Td fiiya Td axendCov nsdia '/at oqy '/at ndaav
TTJV yfjv, vdftog Qsov iariv 6 8odsig sig bXov tov '/oafiov o 8s
vdfiog ovTog vldg Qscfv iari '/rjqvxdstg sig Td niqoTU T^g y^g'
ol 8i vnd T'fjv a'/inyv Xaol 'dvzsg, ol d/ovaavzsg zov '/yqvyfiazog
xat niaTs-vaavTsg sig aiTov. (Mat. xiii. 31; Mark iv. 30.)
Sim. IX. 20. 2. Ol 8s nXovatoi 8va/.6Xwg '/oXXwvtoi Tolg
8ovXoig TOV Qscfii, cpo^ovfisvot fiy ti aiTtaddaiv vn avrdv. Ol
Toiomot ovv Sva'/dXwg elaeXevaovTai elg Tyv paaiXeiav tov Qeov.
(Mat. xix. 23 &c.) Compare also Mand. X. 5 (Mat. xiii. 22).
Sim. IX. 29. 3. Ol niaTevaavzeg Toiomoi elaiv dg vfj/cia
§qicpy elaiv . . . ndvza ydq zd ^qscpy sv8o^d ian naqd Tcp Qsip
xat 7zqcoza naq avTtp. Mcr/dqioi ovv vfislg, baoL dv dqqTE dcp'
savTcov Tfjv novrjqiav ivSvayade 8i ttjv d'/axi'av' nqdzoi ndvzcov
t,fjaEad£ Tip Qscp. (Mat. xviii. 3, 4; 1 Pet. ii. 2.)
4. Ignatius.^
Eph. c. 5. 2. El ydq svdg '/at Ss'miqov nqoGBvxy Toaavzyv laxvv
^ The long passage Sim. v. 2 contains a parable of a lord of a vineyard
who intrusted it to a faithful servant to fence it round. The servant also
however cleared it of weeds and dug it. The lord when he returned not only
gave him his freedom (which he had promised if he kept his trust), but made
him heir along with his son (ouYxXifipovo'iJiov tu ulu [AOu). The lord in his
gladness next gave many robes to this honoured servant, and he, in turn, of his
own freewill shared them with the other servants, which the lord told with
joy to his son and his friends. The explanation is given in § 3, and is that if
we do anything in addition to the command of the Lord we shall have additional
honour. From this the author goes on to urge distribution of superfiuous wealth
among the poor and needy (James i. 27). The passage may be an echo of Mat
xxiv, 45, and of John xv., but it is impossible to found upon it. There is a
beautiful passage, Sim. v, 6, 1, 2: "On o 0£o; tov ajAicEXuva i(D-ixvjoz tout' Utrri
TOV Xaov HxTtoE xai nap^SuxE tu ulu auTou- xai o' ulo; xaTSOT'OCTe tou; k'yY^"
Xou; £tc' auTous tou auvTTjpEfv auTou;- xai auTos rd; ajxapTia? outuv ixaSapiaE
TCoXXd xoradso; xai tcoXXouc xdrcou; iJvtXyjxu;- ou8£li; y^P [onteXuv] 8uvotoi oxa-
cp'^vai aTEp xoicou t} (aoxSou. In the course of the Similitudes are many passages
reminding us of the Gospels, and that is all we can say of them,
' Under the more general head of ' New Testament ' are passages showing

IGNATIUS. Ill
I
s'xet , noGcii fiaXXov r ts tov iniaxonov xat ndayg Tyg ix'/Xrjaiag.
(Mat. xviii. 16-29.)
Eph. c. 11. 1. Tijv fiiXXovaav oqyfjv cpo^ydwfisv. (Mat. iii. 7.)
Eph. c. 14. 2. Oi8Eig jiiaziv snayyeXXdfievog dfiaqzavsi, oi8i
dydnrjv xexTyjisvog fitasl' cpavsqdv to 8iv8qov and tov
'/aqnov aiTOv' cwzwg ol inayyeXXofisvot Xqiazov eivai, 8t' wv
nqdaaovaiv dcpd-fjaovzai. (Mat. xii. 33.)
Eph. c. 17. 1. Jid TOVTO fivqov s'Xa^sv int Tyg '/ecpaXfjg aizov
6 Kvqiog, 'iva nviy Ty s'/'/Xyala dcpdaqaiav. (Mat. xxvi. 7.)
Eph. c. 18. 2. '0 ydq Qedg fjfiwv 'lyanvg b Xqiardg s'/vocpo-
q'fjdrj vnd Maqiag xot' ol'/ovofiiav Qeov i'/ aniqfioTog fiiv Aa^td,
jtvevfiaTog 8i dyiov' og sysvvfjdy '/at s^anTiady 'iva Tip nddst
Td vdcoq '/adaqiajj. (Mat. i. 18 &c.; Luke i. 33; John vii. 42;
Eom. vi. 3. See also Ign. ad Smyrn. c. 1.)
Eph. c. 19. 2. iTwg ovv scpavsqwd-rj Tolg aldatv; daryq iv
ovqavip sXafiipEv vniq ndvTag zovg dariqag, xat Td cpwg aircri)
dvExXdXrjzov yv xat ^svtofidv naqslxsv fj '/aivdzyg aiTOv.^ (Mat. ii.)
Magn. c. 9. 3. Ov /at ol nqocpfjcai jiadrjtat ovrsg Tip nvsv-
fiazi, wg 8t8daxaXov aizdv nqoasddxwv xat 8td tovto, ov 8t'/aiwg
dvifievov, naqdv yyetqev avzovg ex vs'/qiov. (Mat. xxvii. 52.)
Trail, c. 11. 1. WsvyETB ovv rdg xaxag naqacpvd8ag, Tdgysv-
vwaag xaqndv davazycpdqov , ov sav ysvarjcai Tig, naq' aiTd
dnodvfja'/si' oizoi ydq ov/ etfftv cpvzsia noTqdg. (Mat. xv. 13.)
Smyrn. c. 1. 1. Bs^anTia fisvov vnd 'Iwdvvov, 'iva nXyqwdy
ndaa Sf/atoavvy vn' aiTOv. (Mat. iii. 15.)
Smyrn. c. 3. 1. Eyw ydq xat fiezd ttjv avdaraatv ev aaq'/t
avTov oi8a, '/at niOTEvw 'dvza. Kat ate nqdg zovg nsqt IJirqov
rjXdsv, Ecpy aiTolg' Ad^STS, ipyXatpiqaaTi fis, '/at "8etb, oti oi'/
slfit Saifidvtov aadfioTov. Kat sidvg airov fjxpavzo '/at iniazev-
aav '/qadivzeg zy adq'/i avzov '/at Tip nvevfiari.^ (See Luke
xxiv. 36-41, and John xx. 20-22.)
that Ignatius referred to the " Gospel " known as an authority to those whom he
addressed. The following bear on his use of our Synoptists in details. See .ilso
under 'Matthew,' and Introduction, 'Ignatius,' for Echoes of the New Tes
tament, ' The Curetonian has an obscure reading, "the three sacred mysteries which
were done in the tranquillity of God from the Star,"
^ Eusebius (H. E. Ill, 36) quotes these words as far as fitiaTEuuav, saying
that he does not know where Ignatius took them from. Origen says they are
from the 'Preaching of Peter' and Jerome refers them to the 'Gospel of the

112 THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS AND THE SYNOPTISTS.
Smyrn. c. 6. 1. '0 yi^Qdv /w^etVw. (Mat. xix. 12.)
Polycarp. c. 2. 2. Oqdvifiog yivov t5g ocpig iv dnaatv xat
dr/iqaiog sig dst dg y nsqiarsqd. (Mat. x. 16.)
Mart. Ign. (Vatic.) c. 2. Ti ydq 'dtpsXog dyaoftat, idv oXov
TOV '/da fiov '/sqd-f/aw, rfjv 8i xpv'xrjv fiov Cyfiiwdco; Tqa'iavog Ei
nsv "Eoi'/dg fioia ladiqascog ificpqdvov dfioiqog slvai, 8td tovto
i^svTsXi^Eig fiov zdg snayysXiag.
5. Polycarp.
Ep. to Philipp. c. 2. 3. MvrjfiovEvovTsg de wv emev o Kvqiog
dtdaffxwv fi-q '/qivsTS, 'iva fifj '/qidyzs; dcpisTS '/at dcpsd-fjasTai
vfilv iXsslTS, 'iva iXsydrjzs' [ev] w fiirqij) fiSTqslTS, dvTtfiszqrj-
diqaszai vfilv. Kat, (ki fia'/dqtot ol nzcoxot, '/at ol 8iw'/dfisvoi
'ivsxsv 8i'/aioG'vvrjg' ort avTwv iartv fj ^aaiXsia tov Qsov.''- (Mat.
V. 3, 7, 10; vii. 1, 2; Luke vi. 20, 36, 37, 38.)
C. 6. 1. Mfj dnoTOfioi iv '/qiast, sldoTsg ort ndvTsg dcpsiXi-
zai safiiv dfiaqziag. E't ovv 8sdfisda tov Kvqiov, 'iva fjfiiv acpfj,
dcpsiXoftsv xat fjfislg dcptivai. (Compare Mat. vi. 12 — 14.)
C. 7. 2. As'Tjasaiv alzo-Vfisvoi tov navzsndnzyv Qsdv, fifj
slasvEy/slv fjfidg sig nsiqaa fidv, xadwg sinsv b K'vqiog'
rd fiiv nvsvfia nqddvfiov, fj 8s adq§ dadsvyg. (Compare
Mat. vi. 13; xxvi. 41 ; Mark xiv. 38.)
C. 12. 3. Pro omnibus Sanctis orate. Orate etiara pro regibus
et potestatibus et principibus, atque pro persequentibus et odien-
tibus vos, et pro iniraicis crucis, ut fructus vester manifestus sit
in omnibus, ut sitis in illo perfecti. (Compare Mat. v. 44, 48;
1 Tim. ii. 1, 2.)

Hebrews,' They are not very unlike what we have in our Gospels, aud the form
in the ' Gospel of the Hebrews ' seems to have been remembered mainly because of
the peculiar phrase SaifJio'vtov daujxaTOV, on the metaphysical meaning of which
Origen enlarges, (See Hilg, N. T, Extra Can, Rec. Paso, IV. pp. 29, 62; and
below, 'Gospel of the Hebrews.')
• See, on this passage, Introduction, 'Polycarp.' It is enough to observe
here that the passage seems to be a quotation from memory ; here, as in Clement
(see before, p. 105), the clause £XEEfTE I'va £XeyjS'^ts being changed from fiaxapiot
ol £Xeiti|J.0VE;, so as to give it the same form as the previous clauses in the Impe
rative, The order differs from that of Clement, so as to prevent our referring
this passage and that in Clement to one written source different from our canoni
cal Gospels. Compare the way in which Polycarp cites and uses 1 Pet. ii, 20,
(See note uuder 1 Peter, ' Polycarp. ')

MARTYRDOM OP POLYCARP. 113

6. Maktvrdom of Polycarp. ^
C. 7. 1. "Eyovzsg ovv zd naiddqiov, tjj naqaa'/evy 7zeqi 8ei-
nvov wqav i^fjXdov 8icoyftlTai '/at hcnsig fiszd tcov awrjdiov av-
Tolg cinXcov, cog snt Xyarfjv TqiyovcEg. (Mat. xxvi. 55. Com
pare John xix. 14 for naqaa'/svq.)
C. 14. 1. '0 8e [^IIoXv'/aq7iog^ imiaw Tag yelqag noir'jaag
'/at 7TqoG8Edeig, wansq '/qidg iniarjfiog ex fisydXov noifiviov Eig
nqoacpoqdv, bXo'/avTcofia ds'/zdv Tip Qscp fjroiftaafiivov, dvafiXi-
xpag sig tov ovqavdv sins' "KvqiE b Qsdg, 6 navzo'/qdzwq , b
TOV ayanrjcoL! '/at svXoyrjTOv ncaddg aov 'lyaov Xqiarov (Mat. iii.
17; xii. 18; Acts iii. 14; iv. 27, 30) 7icczfiq, 8t ov zfjv nsqi aov
irciyvcoaiv slXr'^cpafisv , b Qsdg dyyiXcov '/at dvvdfiscov '/at ndarjg
•/ziascog navzdg zs'iov yivovg twv 8r/aicov, o'i Lwaiv ivioTiidv aov
svXoydi as, 'oti rj^iioadg fis rfjg fjfiiqag '/at coqag Tavzqg, tov Xa-
j-ielv fiiqog iv dqi'JfKp tcov fiaqzvqwv iv zip ycoTqqiii^t (Mat. xx. 22)
tov XqiOTov aov elg dvdazaaiv Cti^^g (John v. 29) alwviov ipvyf^g
Te '/at adftazog iv dcpdaqaict 7ivevfiaTog dyiov' iv oig 7iqoa8e'/-
dsirjv ivci)7cidv gov ar'jftsqov iv diaicje 7ciovt '/at 7cqoa8E'/zjj, /a-
dcog 7rqorjToifiaaag '/at 7cqoscpaviqwaag '/at inX'fjqcoaag, 6 dxpev-
8fg '/at dXrjdivdg ©eo'g." (John xvii. 3.)
' See Wieseler, Die Christenverfolgungen der Caesaren (1878); and Intro
duction.

114
VI.
GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.
1. Papias.^
Eus. H. E. III. 40. JTe^i de toi; Mardaiov tovz' s'iqrjzai'
Mazdaiog ftiv ovv 'E§qa'i8i 8iaXi/TCi) rd Xoyia avvsyqdxpaTO. 'Hq-
firjvsvaE 8i aird dg yv dvvardg s'/aarog.
2. ' Justin Martyr.' A.
Apol. I. C. 4. p. 55 B. "Ov ydq rqonov naqaXaftdvzsg Tivig
naqd tov 8i8aa'/dXov XqiOTOv fifj dqvsiadat i^STaCdfisvoi na-
qa'/sXsvovTai, tov avrdv rqdnov xaxwg ^wvrsg t'ffwg dcpoqfidg naq-
i'XOvat rolg dXXwg xaraXsystv twv ndvrwv Xqiariavcov dai^siav
¦/at ddi'/'iav atqovfiivoig, (Compare Mat. x. 33.)
Apol. I. c. 14. p. 61 D. 'Iva de fifj aocpiQsad^at vfidg do'|w-
fiev, oXiycov tivcov tcov naq avrov rov Xqiarov 8i8ayfidTWv ini-
ftvrjadfjvai '/aXdg s'xeiv nqd rfjg dnodei^ecog fjyrjodfieda, xai vfii-
rsqov s'arw wg dt'vaTc5v ^aaiXiwv i^Erdaat sl dXydcog rama 8e-
8i8dyfiEda '/at 8i8da'/0fiEv. Bqa'/slg 8i -/at avvrofiOL naq' avrov
Xoyot ysydvaaiv ov ydq aocpiarfjg vn^qyEv , dXXd dvvafug Qeoij
6 Xoyog avTol) fjv. {C. 15) Ilsqi fiiv ovv awcpqoavvrjg tooovtov
sinsv ' "Og av ifi^Xixpjj ywai'/t nqdg rd inidvfifjaat airyg
fjSy Sfioiysvas tjj /aq8iq 7taqd rip Qsip. Kai' El b dcpdaXfidg
gov b ds^tdg G'/avdaXitst as, s'/'/oxpov airdv avficpiqst ydq aoi
fiovdcpdaXfiov slasXdslv sig rfjv §aaiXsiav riov oiqavwv 'y fisrd
TWV 8vo nsficpdifjvat sig rd aldviov nvq. (Mark ix. 47; IVIat. v.
29; xviii. 9.) Kai' "Og yajisl d7coXEXvfiivrjV dcp' sriqov dvdqdg
fioixdrai. Kai' Elai Ttveg otViveg Evvovyiadyaav 'vnd nov dv-
dqdniov, slat 8i oi iysvvfjdrjaav sivovyoi, slat 8i o'i evvovxiaav
• See Introduction, ' Papias ' ; and before p, 53 : Fragments of Papias, &c,
• Justin resembles Matthew closely in the opening and closing incidents of
the Life of Jesus Christ, The following quotations are in the order of their oc
currence in the Apologies and Dialogue,

.lUSTIN MARTYR. 115
savTovg 8id rfjv (ictaiXeiav twv ovqavdv 7iXfjv ov ndvzeg zoZzo
'/wqovatv. (Mat. v. 32; xix. 11, 12.)
Apol. I. c. 15. p. 62 C. Oi ydq zoig 8i'/aiovg oidi rovg aw-
cpqnvag elg fierdvoiav i'/dXeaev b Xqtaziig, dXXd zovg dae[ielg /at
a'/oldarovg xat ddi'/ovg. jEt^re de owwg" Ov/ rjXdov '/aXiaai
8r/aiovg dXXd dfiaqrwXovg sig fisrdvoiav.^ (Mat. ix. 13; Luke
V. 32.) QiXsi ydq b 7raTyq b oiqdviog zfjv fisrdvoiav tov dfiaq-
TCoXov y rf-jv '/d'Xaatv avrov.
Apol. I. c. 15. p. 62 (7.-' Jle^i 8i Tor ariqysiv dnavzag ravza
i8i8a^EV El dyandzs zovg dya7i(ovzag vfidg, zi -/aivdv noielzs;
'/at ydq ol 7cdqvot roiro 7ioiovaiv. 'Eyco 8i vfilv Xiyco' (Mat. v.
44; Luke vi. 28.) E'vysads 'vjriq riov i'/dqcov vfidv /at dyandrs
TOtg fiiaovvzag vfidg -/at siXoyslrE rovg /acaqiofiivovg hfilv -/at
sv'/sads {-7tiq TWV ijf.rjqsa'C.dvTorv vfidg. Elg 8i zd '/oivcovslv zolg
8EOfiivoig ¦/at fiqdiv 7rqdg dd^av 7C0islv ravza s'cpq' (Mat. v. 42;
Luke vi. 34.) Tlavzt np alzovwi 8i8ozs -/at idv [iovXdfievov 8a-
vsiaaadat fifj a7ioaTqacpfjzE. El ydq 8avEiCezs 71 aq' cov iXjcitszs
Xa^slv, ri '/aivdv noislts; zoizo '/at ol TsXiovai noiovaiv. 'Yfislg
de fiy drjaavqi'QTjrs eavrolg S7ct rljg yfjg, 'dnov a fjg '/at §qcoaig
acpaviCsi -/at Xyarat 8toqvaaovaf driaavqi'Csrs de savzolg iv zolg
ovqavolg, 'onov o'vte afjg o'vze (iqibaig dcpavi'Csi. Ti ydq cocpeXel-
rctt dvdqcoviog, dv rdv -/da fiov bXnv '/Eqdijay, rfjv de ^'v'/Jjv avrov
anoXiay; 'Il ri 8coaEi atiJJg dvzdXXayfia; (Mat. vi. 19; xvi. 26;
Luke ix. 25.) Qijaavqitsrs ovv iv zolg ovqavolg, '07100 o'ms a fjg
oms [-iqiuaig dcpavi'Csi. Kai' V'tveade 8i 'xqrjaroi '/at olxriqfiovsg
(Luke vi. 35 ; Mat. v. 45), wg '/at b nazfjq hficov yqrjazdg iazi /cd
ol'/riqfiwv, '/at tov 'fjXiov avrov dvaziXXsL int dfiaqzwXovg '/at
8r/aiovg xat 7iovqqovg.^ Mi) fisqifivdzs 8i zi cpdyrjzs 'rj ri iv8v-
aqads. (Mat. vi. 25, 31-33.) Ovy 'vfislg nov /isrsiviov /at nov
^ eU jJiETavotav is probably an addition to thc passage iu Matthew, but is
part of the text in Luke. The clause 'S^Xei &c. resembles Ezek, xxxiii, 11.
' The following passages give the substance of the Sermon on the Mount, the
earlier parts resembling Luke more than Matthew. Thoy follow the last extract.
* This is one of the passages which Justin cites more than once ; and it ap
pears in the following form in Dial. u. 96, p. 324 A: TtvEabE xP^^^Tol xal ofxTtp-
(iOVEi, u; xal 0 TCaTi^p u'jjiuv o oupdvio?, Kal y^P fp"* TCavToxpaTopa Qeov xpiQi'Tov
xal oixrCppiova o'pu(ji,Ev, tov tj'Xiov auTou dvaTE'XXovra £tcI d)(aptaTous xal 8ixa(ou(;,
xal Pp£')(ovTa iizi doioui; xal 7CovY]pou;, We have in this collocation a proof of
Justin's method of free quotation. He varies here from himself as elsewhere from
our Gospels, See for another form Clem, Hom, III, 57 with aYaSoi for )^pY|aTo(,
See also 1 Clem. 13 (before, p, 105, Apost, Fathers and Synopt,),

116 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
drjqiwv diacpiqere; /at b Qedg rqicpst aird. Mfj ovv fisqifivfjarjzs
ri cpdyrjTS y ri ivdvayads' olde ydq 6 narqq vfidv 6 oiqdviog
'on TOVTCOV xqEtav e/ere. Zrjzelre de t^v ^aaiXeiav rdv oiqavwv
xat ravza ndvra 7CqoGredrpeTat vfiiv. "Onov ydq b tdyaavqog
ianv, i'/sl xat b vovg rov dv&qwnov (compare Luke xii. 22-24,
34). Kai' My notrjts ravra nqdg rd d-sadyvat vnd rdv dvdqcd-
7CWV sl 8i fifj ys, fitaddv oi'/ sysrs naqd rov narqdg vfidv rov
iv rolg oiqavolg. (Mat. vi. 1.)
Apol. I. c. 16. p. 63 B. Ilsqt de Toi; ave|ixa'xoi!g eivat '/xxt
vnyqsTi'/ovg ndat '/at doqyrjrovg a scprj raikd iart ' Tip Tvnrovzi
aov rfjv aiaydva ndqEys '/at rfjv dXXyv, '/at rdv a'iqovrd aov rdv
Xtrwva rj rd Ifidriov fifj '/wXvayg. (Mat. v. 39, 40; Luke vi. 29.)
"Og 8' dv oqyiadjj, svoxdg ianv sig rd nvq. (Mat. v. 22.) Ilavzt
de dyyaqsvovzi as jiiXtov d'/oXovdqaov 8vo. (Mat. v. 41.) Aafi-
ipdzw de Vfiwv rd '/aXd s'qya sfinqoadsv twv dvdqdnwv, 'iva ^Xi-
novTsg davfid^coat rdv nariqa vfiwv rdv iv rolg oiqavolg. (Mat.
V. 16.) 5
Apol. I. c. 16. p. 63 D.^ Ilsqt 8e tov jifj dfivvvai bXcog, rdXydfj
de Xiysiv ast, omwg naqs'/eXevaazo ' .My dfioarjie bXwg, sarco de
vfiMv rd vat vat '/at rd o'v o'v' rd 8i neqtaadv tovtcov ex roi)
novqqov. (Mat. v. 34, 37.) '£2g 8s '/at rdv Qsdv fiovov 8si nqoa-
'/vvslv, owwg snEiGsv elnwv Meyiarrj ivroXfj iart' Kvqiov rdv
Qedv aov nqoa'/vvyasig '/at avnp fidvcij Xarqevaeig s§ bXyg rqg
'/aqdiag aov '/at i^ bXyg rfjg layvog aov, Kvqiov rdv Qsdv rdv notfj-
aavrd as. Kat nqoasXddvrog ainp rivog '/at slndvrog' Aiddo'/aXs
dyads, d7is'/qivaro Xiywv Oi8Etg dyaddg sl fifj fidvog b Qsdg, b
notyaag rd ndvra.'' (SeeMat. iv. 10; xix. 16; xxii. 37; Mark xii. 30.
Compare Dial. c. 93. p. 32 A.)' Oi 8' 'dv fifj svqiaxwvrat ^lovvzsg
wg E8i8a^E yvcoqiCiadwaav fir) 'dvrsg Xqiariavot, xav Xiywatv 8id
yXiircryg rd rov Xqiarov 8t8dyfiara' oi ydq rovg fiovov Xiyovrag
dXXd rovg '/at rd s'qya nqdrrovrag acodfjasadat scprj. Ehte ydq
5 This injunction Xajiijia'TU seems to have been a favourite with the Valen
tinians, « See also Clem. Hom, HI, 56 ; XIX. 2, These words are often found with
wonderful variation. See Japies v, 12; Epiph, Haer. 19. 2; Clem. Alex. V. 14;
and an apparent allusion in the testimony of James prefixed to Clem, Hom. (iT)
o'pxtuai, IkA (iiQ I'Ieotiv.
' For the reading of Jesus's answer we cannot appeal to Justin, as he has
it in two forms. One is in the text and the other in Dial. c. 101. p. 328 A: T(
(jiE Xe'yei? dyaSov; EI? ioTtv aYaSds, d itaTirfp (Jiou d £v toi? oupavoi?.

JUSTIN MARTYR. 117
ovrcog' Ovyt 7rdg b Xiycov fioi' Kvqis Kvqis, siGEXsvasrai elg rf-v
jJaaiXsiav zcov ovqavwv, dXX' b 7roicov zd diXyfia tou narqdg fiov
rov iv zolg ovqavolg. Og ydq d/ovEt fiov '/at noisl a Xiyco a/ovst
TOV dnoarsiXavTog fiB. (Mat. vii. 21 ; Ijuke x. 16 ; John xiv. 24.)
^IlnXXot de iqovai fiof Kiqis Kvqis, oi np aip dvdfian scpd'yofisv
'/at iniofisv '/at dvvdfieig inoifjaafiev ; Kal rore iqd airolg' 'Ano-
yioqelre d7i ifiov, iqydzai rfjg dvofiiag. (Luke xiii. 26; Mat. vii.
22.) ToTe xXnvdfidg i'azai /at (Sqvyfidg nov dddvziov 'ozav ol
fiiv 8i'/aioi Xdfiipcoaiv cog b rjXiog, ol de d8i'/oi nifixpwvrai sig
rd aldviov ni'q. (Mat. xiii. 42, 43.) IloXXot ydq y^ovaiv int tw
ovdfiari fiov, s'^codev fiiv iv8E8vfiivoi Siqfiara 7Tqo(idTcov, s'acodsv
de ovTeg Xvxot dqnaysg'^ ex twv s'qycov aircov intyvwaEads ai-
rovg. ndv de 8iv8qov fifj noiovv '/aqndv '/aXdv, i'/'/dnrsrat '/at
etg 7rvq (idXXsrai. (Mat. vii. 15, 16, 17, 19; xxiv. 5.)
Apol. I. c. 17. p. 64 C. Kar' i'/slvo ydq zdv '/aiqov nqoasX-
ddvrsg Ttveg yqdrcov avrdv, sl 8sl Kaiaaqt cpdqovg tsXeIv. Kat
ans'/qivazo' E'inari fioi, rivog sl'/dva rd vofiiOfia syst; Ol de
Ecpaaav Kaiaaqog. Kat ndXiv dvrans'/qivaro airolg' 'Anddors
ovv rd Kaiaaqog np Kaiaaqi xat rd rov Qsov np Qscp. (Mat.
xxii. 15 &c. ; Luke xx. 22-25.)
Apol. I. C. 31. p. 73 A. 'Ev dfj ralg rdv nqocpyrcov ^IfiXoig
svqofisv 7cqn'/yqvaadfiEvov naqayivdftsvov, yswdfiBVOv 8id naq-
divov, '/at dvdqovfiEvov, '/at dsqansvovra ndaav vdaov '/at nd
aav fiaXa'/iav '/at vs'/qovg dvsysiqovra '/.r.X. (Mat. iv. 23.)
Apol. I. C. 33. p. 74 D. Kat ndXiv dg airoXs^st 8td naq-
divov fiiv rsyd-qadfievog 8id rov 'Haatov nqoscprjrsvdy, axovaars.
EXixdy 8s ovrcog' 'l8ov fj naqdivog iv yaarqt 's^st '/at ri^Erai
vldv, '/at sqovaiv int np dvdfiari avrov Med' fjficov b ©eog. (Mat.
i. 23; compare Isaiah vii. 14; see Luke i. 31.)
Apol. I. c. 61. p. 93 I). "EnBira dyovrai vcp' fjficov svda v8coq
iazi, xat zqdnov dvaysvvyascog, ov xat fjfislg aizot avsysvvfjdyfisv,
dvaysvviovrai ' En' dvdfiazog ' " ydq rov narqdg twv oXcov xat
8 We have the same occurrence described in Dial, c, 76, p, 301 D fur
nishing in its variations another instance of Justin|s untrustworthy mode of
quotation. In both passages however Justin has £(pdYO|J.Ev xal £tc(o(jiev. (See the
passage as quoted below,)
» See also Dial, c, 35, p. 253 B : IIoXXol ^Xsuaovrai iizi tu ot6y.axl [lou,
£'?u3£v £vS£8u}Ji,£voi 6^PnaTa Tcpopdruv, ^ctuSev Si bIui Xutioi apTtaYE?. In Matthew
the present tense ipj^dvTat is used.
»" These words suggest the Baptismal Formula.

118 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
SsanoTov Qsofj '/at rov acoryqog fjficov 'lyaov Xqiarov '/at nvsv-
ftarog dyiov zd iv np v8art tote Xrivrqdv 7ioiovvzai. Kat ydq b
Xqiardg. sinsv 'Av ftfj dvaysvvydfjrs , oi fiy slaiXdrjis elg rfjv
jiaaiXeiav rdv oiqavcov. (Mat. xxviii. 19; John iii. 3-5.)
Apol. I. c. 63. p. 95 C. Kat 'Iqaovg de o Xqtazdg, on oi'/
I'yvcoaav 'lovdaloi ri 7raTyq -/at ri vldg, bfioicog iXiy^cov avroig
¦/at avrdg elnev Ovdeig eyvio rdv nariqa el fifj b vldg, aid i rdv
vldv sl fifj 6 narfjq '/at otg dv dno'/aXvipy b vldg.^^ (Mat. xi. 27;
Luke X. 22.)
Bial. c. 17. p. 235 C. Jvaxqrjarog ydq vfilv sdo^ev eivai,
(iocov 7raq' vfilv Fiyqanraf 'O oi'/dg fiov oixog nqoasvyqg ianv,
ifielg de nsnoi-fj/ars avrdv an'qXaiov Xyazcov. Kat rag rqanitag
riov iv np vacp '/oXXv^ianov '/ariarqsips. (Mat. xxi. 13, especially
Luke xix. 46.) Kat i§da' Ovat hfilv, yqafiftarslg '/at 0aqiaaloi,
vno'/qirat, on dnods'/aro'ms rd ydvoOftov '/at rd nfjyavov , rfjv
8i dydnyv rod Qsov '/at rfjv '/qiaiv oi xaTavosirs' (Mat. xxiii. 23;
Luke xi. 42.) rdcpoi '/s'/ovtajiivoi , s'acodsv cpaivdftevot loqaloi,
f'acodev 8i yiftovreg daricov vs/qim'. (Mat. xxiii. 27.) Kat rolg
yqafifiaTEvaiv Oiat vfilv, yqafifiarslg, 'on rdg xXslg 'syjers, '/at
airot oi'/ slaiq'ysads '/at rovg slasqyofiivovg '/coXvets' (Luke xi.
52; Mat. xxiii. 14.) b8rjyot rvcpXoi. (Mat. xxiii. 16, 24.) i^ 'EnEi8fj
ydq dviyvwg, w Tqvcpiov, wg at'Tog bftoXoyyaag s'cpyg, rd vn'
i'/eivov rov acorfjqog fjfidfv 8i8a"xdivza, oi'/ dronov vojiitw ns-
7iotTj/ivai '/at (iqayia nov i'/sivov Xcr/ia nqdg rolg nqocpyrt/olg
inifivrjadsig.'^^ Bial. c. 49. p. 268 C' * "Oarig int rdv 'loqddvyv norafidv '/a-
>' See also Apol. I. c. 63. p. 96 B, where the words are: "O 'Itjoous eItiev •
Ou8£li; £y^u tov icar^pa, tl \>.¦r^ 6 uld?, ou8k tov uldv zl jxt] d -izaTqp xal ol;
dv d uld; OTCOxaXuiJj-f). See also Dial. c. 100. p. 326 D: 'Ev tu EuaYY'Xiu
YEYPO"^'f°' eEkuv lldvTtt not TCopa6£'6oTat und tou itaTpd?- xal ou6eI? y'^"^'""
TOV TcaTE'pa e! (jli^ d uid;, ou6e tov uldv zl (i.-f\ d TcaTiip xol ol; av d u'ld; dnoxa-
i.-u'ii-fi. (See note on page GO.)
>2 This paragraph is strangely made up. The phrases are almost all from
the Gospels, but they are not in the samo order as in any Gospel. Justin quotes
them again, hut in a new order — again ending with the emphatic TUCpXol oStiyoE.
This shows that he did not alter the order of our Gospels because of following
some other" one e.ieinplar. We append the other passage for comparison : Dial.
c. 112. p. 339 D: Td(poi xixoviapiEvoi, i'Ju^Ev 9atvd(ji£voi upafoi xal ?au3£v y^'-
[j.ovte; o'aT^oiv v£xpuv , tcv Ki8uoa(j.ov dno8£xaTouvT£; , ti^v Sk xdjjiitjXov xoTOTtivov-
Tc;- TU9X0I dSijYot.
' 8 This sentence is quoted because of the occurrence of the word Xo'Yia.
" * This occurs in Justin's reply to Trypho's objection that Elias must come
before Christ; .and that Elias has not come, so th.at Christ must be held as not

JUSTIN MARTYR. 119
dsCofisvo^ i§da' 'Eyw fisv vfidg (lanritw sv v8azi sig ftszdvoiav
y§Ei de o iffxrgoVe^o'g jKOI', ov oi'/ sifit I'/avdg rd vnodfjftara ^a-
ardaat ' avrdg -hfidg (ianriasi iv nvEVfian dyior '/at jtvqi. Ov
rd nrvov avrov iv rfj y^i^Q^ avrov, xat 8ia-/adaqisl rfjv dXcova
avTOv '/at rdv alrov avvd^si sig rijv anod-fj/rjv, rd 8i dxvqov xa-
ra'/avasi nvqt da^iani). Kal tovtov airdv rdv nqocpfjrijv aws-
'/s'/Xsixst 0 jiaaiXsvg vficov 'Hqddqg etg cpvXaxfjv, '/at ysvsaicov
fjfiiqag TsXovfiivrjg , dqyovfiivrjg rfjg i^a8EXcpfjg airov siaqianog
avTcp, sinsv avrfj alryaaadat o idv ^ovXyrai. Kat fj fifjzrjq T^g
7iai8dg vjci^aXsv avry alz'fjaaadat rfjv '/ecpaXfjv Iwdvvov rov iv
rfj cpvXa'/jj' '/at airqadayg i'nefixpe '/at i7ct niva/i ivsydyvat rfjv
¦/ecpaXfjv 'icodvvov i'/iXevas. Aid '/at 6 fjjiireqog Xqiardg elqfj'/si
ini yqg rdrs rolg Xiyovai nqd rov Xqiarov 'HXiav 8elv iXdelv
'HXiag fiiv iXevaerai, '/at dno'/araarfjasi ndvra' Xiyw 8i vfilv,
'on 'HXiag 'y8y rjXds, '/at oi'/ iniyvwaav aizdv, dXX' inoiyaav
ainp 'oaa ydiXrjaav. Kat yiyqanrai 'on Tors avvfjxav ol fia-
driTat 'on nsqt 'icodvvov rov ^annarov slnsv airolg.^ ^ (Mat.
iii. 11,12; xiv. 3-11; xvii. 11-13.)
' Bial. C. 76. p. 301 C. "H§ovatv dnd dvaroXdv -/at dvofidv,
¦/at dva'/Xidqaovzai fiszd 'Afiqadfi '/at 'laadx xat 'laxd§ iv rfj
(laaiXsiiji Tc5v ovqavcov ol de vlot rfjg (iaatXsiag s'/^Xydfjaovrai
sig rd ffxoVog to i^dreqov. Kai' HoXXot iqovai fioi ry fjfiiqcf
i'/sivy, Kvqis, Kvqis, ov np aip dvdfian icpdyojisv '/at iniofisv
'/at nqoscprjTEvaafiEv '/at daific'rvia i^e(}dXoiiev ; Kat iqd airolg'
yet come. Justin, after asserting that Zechariah (compare c, 14, where he quotes
Hosea as Zechariah) has predicted the coming of Elias, goes on to identify John
Baptist with Elias. His argument is that the spirit of Elias coming in John
was the forerunner of the first advent, and that Elijah will come as the fore
runner of the second or glorious advent. He quotes our Lord's own teaching as
referring back to the Baptist and forward to Elias, He is quoting from John
Baptist when the extract begins,
' ' In this passage there is a change from the present tense (?p-fZ-:a.i. Mark
i. 7; Luke iii, 16, d ^pxdjJ.EVo; isx^upoTEpd; (jlou ^cjt£v Mat iii. 11) into the future
vJ'Iei 8^, So also in Dial, c. 88, Justin has ¦fJ^Et Y'^P ^"''^ t''® same passage,
Justin's whole argument (which is not peculiar to him) may be founded on a
mistaken interpretation so far as regards the second advent, but his adherence
to the Gospels in his quotation is close, Clem. Alex, and Origen vary from the
Evangelists more than Justin does. Though Justin alters ?px.ETat into a future
(see the same in c. 35 as quoted before), he does no violence to the text. And
in Mat, xvii, 11 the whole is made future by our Lord himself at the time of the
Transfiguration: 'HX(ac ,u,kv fpx^ETai TCpuTov xal aTCOxaTaCTTiiaEi TcdvTa, although
he goes on to say oti 'HX£a; i\St] nfXSs, See also below Dial, c, 88. 316 B, for
a parallel to the whole passage.

120 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
'Avaywqelre dn' ifiov. Kat sv dXXoig Xoyoig, oig /araSt'/dteiv
rovg dva^iovg fiy adteadai fiiXXei, scprj iqslv 'Yndysrs etg to
ffxoVog TO i^cozsqov, o fjrolfiaasv b narfjq rip aazava '/at rolg
dyyiXoig airov. ^'^ (Mat. viii. 11, 12; compare Mat. vii. 22, 23;
Luke xiii. 26.)
Bial. c. 77. p. 303 A. C. "Ajia ydq rep ysvvydyvai airdv fid-
yot dnd 'A^^a^iag^'' naqaysvdfisvoi, nqoas'/'vvqaav avrip, nqdrs-
qov iXddvrsg nqdg 'Hqwdyv rdv iv rjj yy vfidv rdrs (iaai'Xsvovra.
... (c. 78.) Kat ydq omog b ^aaiXsig 'Hqwdyg^^, ftadiov naqd
rdv nqsa^vriqwv roi Xaoli vfidv, rdrs sXddvzwv nqdg avzdv nov
dnd 'A^qa^iag fidywv, '/at slndvnov, i^ dariqog tov iv np ov
qavip cpavivrog iyvio'/ivai 'on ^aaiXs-vg ysyivvrjzai iv rfj ydqc-c vficov,
'/at yXdofisv nqoa'/vvfjaat avrdv, xat iv 'BydXsifi rdv nqsafivri-
qcov slndvrcov, on yiyqanrai iv rip nqocpfjry ovrwg ' Kat av Bqd-
Xeifi, yfj 'lovda, oi8afiwg iXaxiazrj et iv rolg fjyefidatv 'lov8a' ex
aov ydq E^sXevasrai fjyovfisvog, 'dang noifiavsl rdv Xadv fiov.^^
Tcov dnd 'A^qa^iag ovv fidywv iXddvrwv etg BrjdXsifi '/at nqoa-
•° See the same reference in Dial, i;, 120 p, 349 B: '"'H^ouat Y*?' E'tsv,
died 6uanuv xal dvaToXcov, xal dvaxX'.ittiaovTat (jiETa '.Appadfji xal 'loadx xal 'la-
xciSp i-i Tifl SaotXEta T(3v oupovuv ¦ ol 8k ulol ri^; SaatXEiac ^x3Xit)37)aovTai sl; to
oxo'to; to ^luTEpov. Dial, c, 140 p. 370 A: Kal o Kupio; ijfiiuv xard to ^ikt\-^ui
TOU jt£jjn);avTo; au'rdv itaTpd;, xal Seotcotou tuv o'Xuv, oux av eItiev • "HSouatv dred
8ua|Xtov xal dvaToXuv, xal dvaxXt^TjoovToi [XErd 'Appadfi xal 'loodx xal 'laxoiS
£v Tf paatXECd tcov ou'pavoiv ol 8e ulol T'^; paotXEia; ^xpXiiUii^oovTot sU to uxo-
To; Td £?(OT£pov, See before Apol, I, c. 16. p, 63 D and note 8.
' ' Justin nine times says that the Magi came from Arabia (St Matthew says
merely d:t' dvaToXuv), and his references to them are so numerous that this must
be regarded as his complete conviction. The facts, that Arabia is called "ffte East"
in the O, T, Judges vi. 3; Job i, 3 (but see also for a wider reference Gen.
xxix, 1; Num. xxiii. 7; Isaiah xlvi. 11), and that it produces the gifts which
the Magi brought, may he the foundation of this view ; which see also in Ter
tullian adv. Marc. Ill, 13, and Epiph. Haer, III. 80, On the other hand, Clem,
Alex., Origen, Chrysostom, &c., say that they came from Persia or Chaldea.
'8 The sentence quoted in full is incomplete in Justin, there being no verb
for 'HpfciSiT)?. ' s This citation is from Micah v. 2, and is found also word for word in
Apol. I, f,. 34, Justin's words correspond much more closely with Mat, ii, 6 than
with the LXX, where the passage runs thus: Kal au Biq^XEkjji oixo; 'EqppoSd,
dXiYOSTo; e! tou eIvoi £v x'Xido'.v 'Iou8a- ^x aou (Jioi d^EXEuoErai Toij slvai Ei;
dpxovTa TOU '[apainX. There are other instances of Justin resembling Matthew's
Gospel in citing the O. T. Thus in Apol. I. c. 35 he cites (as from Zephaniah)
Zech, ix, 9, but except in the opening call he follows Mat, xxi, 5, not the LXX,
(He quotes the same passage Dial, c, 53, p. 273 A with the right reference to
Zechariah and more in accordance with the LXX.) So also in Dial. c. 17. p. 236 C
he combines Isaiah lvi. 7 and Jeremiah vii. 11 as in Mat. xxi, 13; and the com
bination is too remarkable in itself to allow us to think the similarity accidental.
See also the close of this extract.

JUSTIN MARTYR. 121
'/vvqaavnov rd naidiov '/at nqoaEvsy/dvrwv ainp 8cdqa, /^uffov
xat Xi§avov '/at afivqvav, insidfj '/ar' dno'/dXvipiv, fisrd rd nqoa-
xvvfjaai rdv 7ral8a iv BydXsifi, i'/s'Xsvadrjaav fifj snavsXdslv nqdg
TOV Hqcodyv. Kat Icoafjcp 8i, b rfjv Maqiav fisfivqarsvfiivog, (iov-
Xydstg nqoTSqov ix^aXelv rfp/ fivrjarfjv ainp Maqidfi, vofiitcov
sy/vftovslv avrfjv and awovaiag dvdqdg, Tovziariv dnd noqvsiag,
8l oqd ftarog '/s'/iXsvaro fiy ix^aXslv rfjv yvvalxa airov, slndv
rog avrip TOV cpavivrog dyyiXov 'on ix nvsvftarog dyiov o sysL
xard yaarqdg iart. (Compare Mat. ii. 1-12; i. 19, 20.) (Do^ydstg
ovv, oi'/ sx^i§Xrj/Ev airfjv, dXXd, dnoyqacpfjg o'vayg iv rfj 'lov8aicf
rdrs nqcoryg int Kvqrjviov (Luke ii. 2), dvsXrjXvdsi dnd Na^aqir
e'vda ip-xsi, elg BydXesfi, cidsv yv, dnoyqdi^iaadat' dnd ydq rfjg
'/aroixovayg rfjv yyv exeivqv cpvXfjg 'loida rd yivog yv. Kat ai-
rdg afia ry Maqici '/sXevsrat i^sXdslv sig A'iyvnrov, xat stvat
i'/sl dfia Tcp naidiqi, dyqig dv airolg ndXtv ano'/aXvcpdfj inaveX-
¦delv sig rfjv 'lov8aiav. (Compare Luke ii. 1-5;^" Mat. ii. 13-15.)
rsvvqdivTog 8i rdrs rov naidiov iv BydXESfi, snEt8y 'icoafjcp oi'/
eixev iv ry '/dfiy i'/siv-y noi xaraXvaai, iv anyXaiio^^ rivt avv-
syyvg rfjg '/dfiyg '/ariXvas' '/at rdrs, airdv ovtwv exe/, STErd'/st
y Maqia rdv Xqiarov, '/at iv cpdrvy avrdv iTsdsixst' 'onov sX-
ddvrsg ol and 'A^qa^iag fidyoi svqov avrdv. (Compare Luke ii. 7.)
. . . Kat 0 'Hqcodyg, fifj snavsXddvrwv nqdg airdv riov dnd 'A^-
qa^iag fidywv, dg fj^iwasv airovg noifjaai, dXXd '/ard rd '/sXsv-
xsdivra airolg 8i' dXXyg b8ov sig rfjv xdqav ccircov dnaXXayiv-
nov, '/at TOV 'icoafjcp dfia rfj Maqicx xat rep nai8iio, t&g '/at ai
rolg dnoxsxdXvnro, y8y i^sXddvrcov etg A'iyvnrov, ov yivcoa'/iov
rdv 7cal8a, ov iXyXvdstaav nqoa'/vvyaat ol fidyoi, ndvrag dnXcog
rovg nal8ag rovg iv BqdXsifi ir/iXsvasv dvatqsdyvai. Kat rovro
inE7tqoipfjzsvro fiiXXsiv yivsadat 8id 'Isqsfiiov, slndvrog 8t avrov
rdv dyiov nvsvfiarog ofjrwg' Owvfj sv 'Pafid qxavady, '/Xavd-fidg
'/at odvqfidg noXvg' 'PaxyX '/Xaiovaa rd ri'/va airfjg, '/at ov/ fjdsXs
naqa'/Xydfjvai, 'on oi/ slaiv.^^ (Compare Mat. ii. 18; Luke ii.)
'" See note on Luke xxi.
' • Early Christian tradition corroborates this statement that the place of the
birth of Christ was a cave. The Protev, Jacobi and other Apocryphal Gospels
have details; and Origen cont, Cels. u, 51 says: AeCxvutoi to ^v Bif)5X£E|a, okt)'-
Xaiov, h'Za iyzit-fi'3t\ , xal it) £v tu aTiT)Xo(tp (paTvif), i'viJa ^oitapYavuiif).
a 2 This closely resembles Mat! ii. 18 rather than the LXX (Jerem. xxxviii. 15)
which runs thus: <Puvii ^v "Pap,d itixouoST] iprivou xal xXaujfJLOu xal d8up(j,ou'
'PaxiiX dj^oxXaiofXE'vit) oux -fiSEXs xauCTauSai iiA Tof; vlot? auTTJ;, on oux sjalv.

122 GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.
Bial. c. 82. p. 308 C. Elns ydq (o Kvqiog), 'on cpovevsadat
¦/cd fiiasladat 8id rd ovofia airov fiiXXofisv, '/at on xpEvdonqo-
cpqrat '/at ipsi-ddyqiarot noXXot snt np dvofiari avrov 7taqE'XEv-
aovrat '/at noXXovg jiXavyGovGi. (Compare Mat. xxiv. 5, 9, 24.)
Bial. c. 88. p. 316 B. 'Icodvvov ydq -/adsCofiivov^ ^ snt to'v
'loqddvov '/at '/yqiaaovrog ^dnnafta fisravoiag, '/at tdvyv dep-
ftarivqv xat svdvfia dnd rqiydv '/afiyXov fiovov cpoqovvrog '/at
iiTjdiv iadiovrog nXfjv d'/qi8ag /at fiiXi dyqtov, ol dvdqwnot
vnsXdfi^avov airdv slvai rdv Xqiarov ' nqdg ovg '/at avrdg i^oa'
Ov/ slfit b Xqiardg, dXXd ipcovfj ^owvrog' fj^st ydq b layvqars-
qdg fiov, ov oi'/ slfit txavog Tti -vno8yfiaTa ^aardaat. Kat sX-
ddvTog TOV 'lyaov snt rdv 'loqddvqv, '/at vofiitofiivov Iwafjcp rov
ri'/rovog vlov vndqxsiv, '/at aetdoiig, c'og al yqacpat sx'fjqvaaov, ipai-
voftivov, '/at rixTovog'^^ vofiiKofiivov {rama ydq rd rs'/rovt/d
s'qya slqydCero iv dvdqconoig iov, dqorqa '/at ^vyd, 8id rovnov
'/at rd rfjg 8i'/aioavvrjg avfi^oXa dtdaffxwv '/at svsqyfj ^iov), rd
nvEVfia ovv rd dyiov xat 8td rovg dvdqwnovg, ti»g 7iqoicprjv, iv
s'iSst nsqiarsqdg sninry'^^ avnp, '/at cpwvfj ex riov ovqavdv dfia
iXyXvdsi, ^Vtg '/at 8id Aavt8 Xsyofiivq, cog and nqoawnov av
rov Xiyovrog 'onsq aircp dnd rov narqdg s'fisXXs Xiysadai' ^^
2' Justin elsewhere also speaks of John "sitting" by the Jordan (Dial,
cc, 49, 51). Evidently therefore this addition to the canonical narrative was
in his opinion a historical fact. The other items of the opening description are
canonical. See Mat, iii, 1 ; iv, 11 ; Mark i, 4 ; Luke iii. 3, 15; John i. 20, 23.
2* See Mark vi, 3. 'There Jesus is called a carpenter; but the description
here of the work he did is additional. In the Gospel of Thomas (Greek A.
C, XIII) ploughs and yokes are also stated to have been made by Jesus, There
are in the Apocryphal Gospels many other details of miracles &c. connected with
the opening years of Christ's manhood. In Origen's time — probably from mistaken
pride — the reading in Mark seems to have omitted te'xtuv ; for Origen denies that
Jesus is so called in the published Gospels. (Cont. Cels. VI, 36.)
2^ 'EkI-kxi]. Justin does not use xarapatvu, as all the canonical accounts do.
'* The voice is said in another passage of the Dial, (c. 103. p. 331 B) to
have used those words (which are a quotation from Ps. ii). In this passage it
is not said that the memoirs are the authority. In the other passage the memoirs
are not quoted for the voice, although they are quoted for other parts of the
narrative. This form of the words addressed to our Lord is therefore an un
canonical addition. It must have been widely spread, being found in the Ve
tus Itala and in Cod, D ; and in many of the early fathers (Clem. Alex., Lac
tantius, &c.). Augustine expressly says that it was the reading of some of the
MSS of Luke iii, 22, though not of the earliest. The supposition that Justin in
agreeing with a Jew thought to add weight to liis argument by substituting a
quotation from the Psalms for thc canonical words, is both unnecessary and im
probable. The version of Justin is in accordance with a very early tradition
which probably arose from lapse of memory. Many Christians at this day would

JUSTIN MARTYR. 123
Yiog fiov et av, syc^ ayfisqov ysyiwqxd as' rdrs yiveaiv aliov
Xiycov yiveadai rolg avdqwnoig, i^drov fj yvioaig airov EfisXXs
yivsadat. Bial. c. 93. p. 321 A. "Odev fioi 8o'/el '/aXcog elqfjadat vnd
rov fjfieriqov Kvqiov '/at acoryqog 'lyaov Xqiarov, sv dvatv ivro-
Xalg ndaav 8ixaioavvyv '/at svai^eiav nXyqdiaiyai' elat de ay-
Tat • Ayan-fjaeig Kvqiov rdv Qsdv aov e^ 'dXyg rfjg '/aqdiag gov
¦/at e| oXyg rf-jg layvog aov, xat tov nXqaiov aov cog asavrdv.
(Mat. xxii. 37-39; compare Luke x. 27; Mark xii. 30.)
Bial. c. 99. p. 326 A. 2ravqwdsig ydq elnsv, b Qsdg, 6 ©eog,
i'va Tl iy/aTiXinig fie; (Mat. xxvii. 46; compare Ps. xxii. 1.)
Bial. c. 99. p. 326 A. Ty ydq yfiiqa, yneq s'fisXXs azavqov-
adai, rqelg nov fiadrjzdv airov naqaXajicov elg rd 'dqog rd Xeyd-
fiEvov 'EXaicdv, naqa'/eifievov ei&vg rcj) vacp iv 'leqovaaXfjft, yvyezo
Xiycov ndreq, el dvvardv iart, naqeXdino rd noT'fjqiov tovto
d7r' ifiov. Kat fterd rovro evydftevog Xiyet' Mfj cog iyco jiovXo-
fiat, dXX' cog av diXsig. (Mat. xxvi. 39.)
Bial. c. 100. p. 327 A. "Odsv '/at iv zolg Xdyoig avrov scprj,
'drs nsqt rnv ndaysiv airdv fiiXXsiv disXiysro, on Jsl rdv vldv
rov avdqwnov noXXd nadslv, xat anodo'/tfiaadyvai , vnd rdv
(Uaqiaalwv xat yqafifiaricov, xat aravqcodf^vai '/at rfj rqiry fjfiiqc^
dvaarfjvat.^'' (Mat. xvi. 21; Mark viii. 31; Luke ix. 22.) Yldv
ovv avdqdnov savrdv EXsysv , yrot dnd rfjg ysvvfjaEcog rfjg 8id
naqdivov, rjtig yv, wg scpijv, arid rov Aavid '/at 'laxcd^ xat 'laad'/
•/al A§qadfi yivovg, 'fj 8id rd sivai airdv rdv 'Addfi nariqa '/at
give the same account as Justin ; and the application of the words of the psalm
to Jesus Christ in the New Testament (Acts xiii, 33 ; Heb. i. 5) makes the mis
take natural enough,
a' For parallels see Dial, t, 51. p, 271 A: Ae'yei oti 6£r aurdv TtoXXd TtaSiEv
dnd TUV YPO(Ji|Ji.aT£uv xal <Papioa(uv xal aTaupu2i()vat xal ttJ TpCrrj vjn^pot a'va-
aTiQvat xal TcdXiv TcapaYEvniiEaSat ^v "l£pouoaXii[A xal tote toi; fJia3T)Taf; auTOu
auixraEiv TidXtv xal oufiqaaYEiv; and Dial, c. 76, p, 302B: 'Epda Y'^P ^P° "^^^
OToupubrivai, 8ei tov uldv tou dvSpuKOu udXXa naSEtv , xal dT:o8ox'.txao5if5vai uitd
Ttov Y?»,u..u.«T^uv xal Qapwaiuv , xal OTaupuSrjvai , xal Tti fP^^Tl iV^P? avaaTij-
vat. We have Justin's usual freedom of citation exemplified in these extracts.
It is noteworthy that where the Evv, have ditoxTav "i^vai , Justin has OTaupu-
itjvat. Irenaeus also has this word: Haer, III, 18. 4: Bx eo enim, inquit, coepit
demonstrare disceiitibus, quoniam oportet ilium Nierosolymavi ire et multa pati a
sacerdotihus, et reprobari et crucifigi et tertia die resurgere. (Compare Mark viii. 31
and Luke ix. 22, as well as Mat. xvi. 2], to which Irenaeus seems to refer the
words,) Compare Luke xxiv. 7, where the same araupuSiivai occurs. See OTau-
puoai in Mat, xx, 18. See on the text Drummond in Theol, Rev. April, 1877,
p. 180.

124 GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.
TOVTWV TCOV '/arrjqidfiyfiivcov, i§ wv '/ardyst y Maqia rd yivog'
'/at ydq narsqag rdv ysvvcofiivcov ralg dvyarqdaiv avrdv ri'/vwv
rovg TCOV dyXsidv ysvvfjrnqag Eniardfisda. Kat ydq vldv Qsov,
Xqtardv, '/ard rfjv rnv narqdg airov dno'/dXvipiv sniyvovza ai
zdv sva rdv fiadyrwv airov, 2iftcova nqdrsqov '/aXovfievov, snw-
vdfiaas Jlirqov.^^ Kat vldv Qsov ysyqajifiivov avrdv iv rolg
anofivyfiovsvfiaai twv dnoardXcov airov Eyovrsg xat vldv avrdv
Xiyovrsg vevo-fjxafiev 'ovra '/at 7cqd ndvrcov noiyfidrwv and rov
narqdg dvvdfiei airnij '/at (iovXjj nqoeXddvra, og '/at aocpia '/at
fjfisqa '/at dvaroXfj '/at iid'xaiqa '/at Xid-og '/at ^d(}8og '/at la'/ioft
'/at 'laqafjX xar dXXov '/at dXXov rqdnov iv rolg rdv nqocprjrdv
Xdyoig nqoayydqsvrai, '/at did rfjg naqdivov avdqwnov yeyovivai
'iva xat 8t' fjg b8ov fj dnd rov ocpeorg naqaxofj rfjv aq'yfjv s'Xa^s,
8id ravrrjg rfjg b8ov xat '/ardXvaiv Xd§jj. (Mat. xvi. 16 &c.).
See the same contrast or comparison, Iren. III. 22. §4; VI. 19. §1.
Bial. c. 102. p. 329 C. "^lyfpavrng airov '/at firj/ixt snt Hi-
Xdrov dno'/qivaadai fty8iv fiy8Evi ^ovXoftivov, cog sv rolg ano-
fivrjfiovsvfiaai tcov dnoardXcov airov 8E8'rjXcoTat. (Mat. xxvii. 14.)
Bial. c. 103. p. 330 C. Kat rd "Ilvoi^av in' ifii rd ardfta
aircov dg Xicov wqvdfiEvog 8yXol rdv fiaatXia rdv 'lovdaiwv rdrs
'dvza, -/at avrdv 'Hqcodyv Xsydfisvov, 8id8oxov ysysvqfiivnv 'Hqd-
8ov TOV, OTE iysyivvqro, dvsXdvrog ndvrag rovg sv BqdXssft i'/si
vov rov '/aiqov ysvvqdivrag nal8ag, 8id rd vnovoslv iv airolg
ndvrcog sivat rdv 7csqt ov slqfj'/siaav ainp ol dnd 'A^qa^iag iX
ddvrsg fidyoL' fifj E-niardfiEvog rfjv rov layvqoriqov ndvrwv §ov-
'Xfjv, cog sig A'iyvnrov np 'iwafjip '/at rfj Maqicx e'/E'/sXev'/el dnaX-
Xayfjvat Xa^ovat rd naidiov, xai eivat exct 'dyqtg dv ndXiv avroig
ano'/aXvcpdfj inavEXOslv sig rfjv ycoqav airdv ' '/dxsl yaav dnsX-
d dvrsg dxqtg dv dnidavsv b dno'/rsivag rd sv BrjdXesji naidia
'Hqd8qg. (Compare Mat. ii.)
Bial. c. 103. p. 331 B. See before, page 63.
Bial. c. 105. p. 333 B. See before, page 64.
Bial. c. 107. p. 334 B. See before, page 64, note 8.
Bial. c. 122. p. 350 B. 'ff ydq dv xaxei'votg ifiaqrvqst b Xqi
ardg' vvv 8i 8i7iXdrEqnv vlot ysivvqg, dg airdg sms, yivsade.
(Mat. xxiii. 15.)
'" Sec before, page 61, for another reference to this change of Peter's name,
from Dial. >;. 106. p. 333 D.

JUSTIN MARTYR. 125
Bial. c. 125. p. 354 B. 'iig b ifidg Kvqtog slnsv 'EfqXdsv b
ansiqiov tov a7C£lqai rdv aicdqav, '/at b fiiv snsasv sig rfjv bddv,
0 8i sig rdg a'/dvdag, 6 de int rd nsrqdSy, b 8i inl rfjv yfjv
xaXyv. (Mat. xiii. 3 &c.)
Bial. c. 125. p. 354 B. "Ozs ydq dvdqw7iog yiyovsv, c'og nqo-
slnov, nqoarjXdsv ainp 6 8id(ioXog, rovziaziv fj 8'vvafiig s/sivq
rj '/at ocpig '/sr/Xrjfiivrj '/at 2aravdg, 7TSiqdKwv aizdv, '/at dyiovi-
tdfisvog '/ara^aXsiv 8id rov d^iovv nqoa'/vvfjaat airdv. '0 de
avzdv '/aziXvas '/at /arijiaXsv, iXiy^ag 'dn 7cnvTjqdg ian, naqd
rrjv yqacpfjV a^icov nqoa/vvsladat dg Qsdg, dnoardryg rfjg rov
Qscfv yvdfirjg ysysvrjfiivog. 'Ano'/qivszai ydq ainp' liyqanrai,
Kvqiov rdv Qsdv aov nqoa'/vvfjastg , '/at ainp fidvit) XarqEvasig'
"/at fjzryftsvog xat iXqXsyfiivog dnsvsvas rdrs 6 did^oXog.^^
Justin Martyr. B. Citations not in our Gospels.
Bial. c. 35. p. 253 B. * Elns ydq • HoXXot sXsvaovzai int np
dvdfiari fiov, s'acodsv iv8s8vfiivoi 8iqfiaTa nqo^drcov, s'acodsv de
s'lai Xv'/oL dqnaysg. Kai' "Eaovrat axiofiara xat alqiasig. Kai'
Hqoaixszs and rdv \psv8onqocpTjrcxrv, o'irivsg iXsvaovzai nqdg vfidg,
s'^wdsv iv8E8vfiivot 8iqfiaza nqo§drcov, sawdsv 8i slat Xv/ot dq
naysg. Kai' 'Avaarfjaovrat noXXot xpsvdoxqiaroi '/at \pEv8and-
aroXoi, '/at noXXovg twv niarwv nXavfjOovatv. (Mat. vii. 15;
xxiv. 5.)

" Citation from Deut, vi, 13 agreeing not with LXX but with St. Matthew,
On this passage see before, page 63 note 5.
• The predictions of schism and heresies are not found in our Gospels,
The quotations before and after this clause are from St. Matthew. Justin seems
again to refer to this prediction. Dial. c. 57, The same reference may per
haps have been in Paul's mind, 1 Cor, xi, 18, 19. The Clementine Homilies
XVI, 2 combine the two predictions, faovrat fap, u; d Kupto; e!h£V, ii)£u8a7td-
UToXoi , (JieuSEr; icpotp-iJTat, aipEOEt; qjiXap^fai. Hegesippus (Eus. H. E. IV. 22)
speaks of false Christs, false prophets, false apostles. So also Clem. Recog, IV.
34, The prediction of heresies is found also in Tertullian, The words are there
fore found both before and after the time when the canonical Gospels had an
exclusive place. Even a writer so late as Lactantius refers to the prediction of
Heresies, whether from an apocryphal Gospel or only from oral tradition we have
no means of deciding. To say that the source must be the Gospel of the He
brews because Hegesippus made exclusive use of it, is to build too much on a
narrow foundation. See Dial. c. 51. p, 271 B (below), and Dial, c, 82. p. 308 C
for the same prophecy with the variations we might expect in Justin,

126 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
Bial. c. 47. p. 267 A.^ Aid xat 6 fjfiirsqog Kvqiog 'iqaovg
Xqiardg shrsv sv oig dv Vfidg '/araXd^co, iv rovroig xal '/qtvd.
Bial. c. 51. p. 271 A. Xqtazdg xat airdg Xiycov on iyyvg
ianv fj ^aaiXsia rdv oiqavcov '/at 'art 8e1 a-mdv noXXd nadslv
dnd TWV yqafifiaricov '/at (Daqtaaicov , '/at aravqwdyvat '/at ry
rqiry fjfiiqq dvaaryvai, '/at jcdXiv naqaysvyasadat iv 'Isqovaa-
Xfjfi '/at rdrs rolg fiadrjralg airo'v avfintelv ndXiv /at avficpayelv,
'/at EV np fisra^v rfjg 7iaqovaiag airov XQ^rcji, wg nqoscpyv, ys-
vfjasadat Isqsig '/at ipsvdonqocpfjrag int np ovojiart avrov nqo-
Sfirjvvas xai omw cpaivsrat 'dvra.^
Bial. c. 69. p. 296 A. Ol 8s {'lov8alot) /at ravra {rd riqara)
bqcovzsg yivd fisva, cpavraaiav fiayi'/yv yivsadat sXsyov '/at yaq
fidyov sivat airdv irdXfiwv Xiysiv '/at XaonXdvov.^
Bial. c. 88. p. 315 B. Kat rdrs iXd ovzog rov 'Itjoov int rdv
'loqddvqv 7iorafidv, svda b 'icodvvrjg ijidnn'C.E, /azsXddvzog zov
'Iqaov i7ii zd 'v8wq '/at nvq dv/jcpdij iv rip Ioq8dvy, '/at ava8-vv-
rog airov dnd rov 'vdarog cog neqiareqdv rd dyinv nvevfia ini-
nrijvat in airdv syqarpav ol dndaroXot airov to'vtov tov Xqi
arov fjfidv.'^ (Compare Mat. iii. 13 &c.)
' Clem, Alex, has quoted the same passage or very nearly. His words are
i<f ol; Yop «¦' Eupu u'na;, tpiQslv, £it;1 toutoi; xol xptvu. In later times it was
widely current, heing attributed to Ezekiel or some other. It is argued that be
cause Clement on another occasion has quoted the Gospel according to the He
brews therefore both Justin and he obtained this also frora that Gospel, Bnt
while this is possible, it is only a hypothesis. See also Acts xx. 35, where we
have a saying of our Lord preserved by tradition. May not this be an example
of the same thing ?
s This, in so far as it is uot a quotation, seems to be a blending from me
mory of our Lord's predictions with the Gospel narrative,
* This is a perfectly justifiable allusion to the Jewish treatment of our
Lord as working by the power of Beelzebub (Mat. ix. 34 ; xii, 24), Lactantius
says that the Jews thought Christ a Magician, and grants that such an opinion
might have been entertained had not the prophets predicted such things of the
Messiah, In thc Clera, Recog, we have allusions to thc idea that Christ wrought
by magic. And in the "Gospel of Nicodemus" the Jews before Pilate charge
Jesus with being a magician.
^ The construction here shows that the narrative of the kindling of a fire in
the Jordan docs not depend, as the reference to the descent of the Dove does,
upon the testimony of the Apostles, The punctuation is disputed ; but if we read
dviQ(pSY], and there is no good reason for any other reading, the rules of con
struction separate the one clause frora the other. The Apostles are therefore
quoted only for the descent of the Spirit. In all the Gospels xaTa^atvu describes
the descent of the Spirit ; here it is cTOKTtivat ; but the ciiange is quite in Justin's
manner. The passage occurs in course of au argument nsed by Justin to prove
that the outward manifestations given to Christ did not make him the Christ, but
only proved to men that He was the Christ, The mention of the fire is inci-

LETTER TO DIOGNETUS. HEGESIPPUS. 127
Bial. c. 106. p. 333 C. Kat ort sv fiiacji rdv d8sXcpdv airov
i'azrj, Tttiv dnoardXwv o'irivsg . . . fisrsvdyaav irct rd dcpiaraadai
avrov OTS iaravqctdq, '/at fisz' avrwv dtdycov 'vjivqas rdv Qsdv,
wg '/at sv rolg dnofivyfiovsvfiaat rdv anoardXwv drjXovrat ysys-
VTjfiivov, rd Xsinovra to'v xpaXfiov idfjXcoasv. (See Ps. xxii. 22, 23)."
3. Letter to Diognetus.^
C. 9. Hsqt ivdvaswg '/at rqocpfjg ftfj fisqifivdv. (Mat. vi.
25-31.) 4. Hegesippus.^
Eus. H. E. III. 20. '^Ti de nsqiyaav ol dnd yivovg rov Kv
qiov vlcovot 'lov8a, rov '/ard adq'/a Xsyofiivov airov ddsXipov, ovg
idyXardqsvaav , cog ex yivovg ovrag Aa§i8. Tovrovg 8' 6 'lovd-
'/arog^ yycxys nqdg Aofisriavdv Kaiaaqa ' icpo^slro ydq rfjv 7raq-
ovaiav rov Xqiarov tiig '/at 'Hqcodyg.^ (Mat. ii.)
Eus. H. E. II. 23. 'A'/qi^iarard ys fifjv rd xaT^ avrdv b
'Hyyainnog, int rfjg nqcoryg rdv dnoardXcov ysvofisvog dtaSoyfjg,*'
ev np nifinrcti airov vnoftvfjfian rnvrov Xiywv lazoqsl rdv rqd-
dental ; but the argument admits of the speaker supplementing the canonical Gos
pels from other sources. There are many allusions to the fire in the apocryphal
traditions of the early Church. According to Epiphanius the Ebionite Gospel said
that when Jesus was coming up out of the water a great light shone about the
place, A heretical Gospel called Pauli Predicatio refers to the fire, saying also
that Jesus who acknowledged personal sin was constrained by his mother Mary
to submit to John's Baptism, Althongh Justin therefore clearly supplements the
canonical books: we cannot be sure of his source.
* The "Memoirs" are quoted here for our Lord's singing hymns with His
brethren according to the prediction in the psalm. There is incidentally men
tion of all the disciples forsaking Him, when He was crucified, and it is explicitly
stated elsewhere (Apol, I. c, 50. 86 B) that they forsook Him after He was cru
cified. But nothing more than rhetorical use, perhaps amplification, of the Gospel
narrative can be made out against Justin, Sec Mat. xxvi, 56 ; Mark xiv, 60 ; Luke
xxiv. 13-33,
' Diognetus, See note p. 65.
' Hegesippus. See Introduction.
' Many various readings — 'IxoupdTo;, 'Icudxaro;, 'Houoxoto;,
" This passage refers to the incident in Herod's history which we learn from
Mat, ii. Epiphanius says that the Gospel of the Hebrews, as used by the
Nazarenes and Ebionites, did not contain the first two chapters of Matthew's Gos
pel. Hegesippus cannot therefore have used it as his authority here. See even
Hilgenfeld (Nov. Test, extra Can. Eec, Evang. sec. Hebraeos, p. 19),
* Rufinus translates thus : Hegesippus, qui post ipsas statim primas aposto
lorum successiones fuit; and Jerome seems to have the passage in view when he
says Vicinus Apostolorum temporurn. (De Vir, 111. 22.)

128 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
nov. . . . '/at dnsv-qivaro (idxw^og) cpwvfj fisydXy ' Ti fxs insqw-
rdrs nsqt 'lyaov rov vldv tov avdqwnov; '/at avrdg '/adrjzat iv
Tip ovqavip ex de^twv T^g fisydXyg 8vvdfiEwg, '/at fiiXXsi sqye-
adat int rdv vstpsXcov rov oiqavov . . . Avajidvrsg ovv '/azi^a-
Xov rdv 8i'/aiov, '/at s'Xsyov dXXrjXoig' Xiddawfiev 'Id'/w^ov rdv
8i'/aiov. Kat yq^avro Xidd^eiv airdv, inet 'xara^Xrjdeig ov/ ans-
davsv, dXXd azqacpsig sd-q'/s rd ydvara Xsywv Haqa'/aXd, Kvqis
©ee ndrsq, dcpsg airolg' ov ydq o'idaat ri 7[0L0vaiv. (Mat. xxii.
16; xxvi. 64; xxi. 9, 15; Luke xxiii. 34.)*
Eus. H. E. IV. 22. "Ex rs rov '/ad' 'E^qaiovg siayysXiov '/at
rov —vqia/ov, '/cd tdt'wg ex T^g 'Ejiqat8og 8iaXi'/rov zivd ridyaiv,
ificpaiviov i§ 'Ejiqaiiov savrdv 7ZEniarEV'/ivai.^
Phot. Cod. 232 (9'" cent.) from Stephan Oobar (6* cent.).
"On rd yroifiaafiiva rolg 8i'/aioig dyadd oms dcpdaXfidg sidsv,
o'vrs ovg y'/ovasv, o'vte iyit '/aqdiav avdqdnov avsjirj. Hyqain-
nog fiivroi, dqyaldg rs dvfjq '/at anoaroXr/dg, iv rip rcifi-nzii)
TCOV 'vnofivyfidnov, oi'/ old' b,ri '/at nadcov, fidryv fiiv slqfjadai
raira Xiyst, '/at '/aTa\psv8sadat rovg ralka cpafiivovg twv rs
dsicov yqacpwv '/at rov Kvqiov Xiyovrog' Ma'/dqtot ol ocpdaXfiot
Vfidv ol ^Xinovrsg, '/at rd wra vficov rd d'/ovovra, xat s^yg.''
(Mat. xiii. 16.)
5 Hegesippus here reproduces the peculiar use of dcpiEvai in the sense of
'to forgive' without an expressed object. There is no instance of this in the N.
T, save in S. Luke. (See Sanday, Gospels in the Second Century, p. 143.)
° It seems most probable that Eusebius refers to the natural use made hy
Hegesippus of the Aramaic and the Hebrew Gospels, unless indeed these be the
same thing, Lardner suggests that we have the true rendering undesignedly given
by Jerome (adv. Pelag. IH) In Evangelio juxta Hebraeos, quod Ohaldaico quidem,
Syroq-ue sermone, sed Hebraicis Uteris scriptum est. (Lardner I. 357.)
' Hegesippus is here opposing the Gnostics, who founded much of the de
fence of their esoteric doctrine on this passage. Hegesippus possibly pleaded
strongly — so strongly that Stephan could uot understand him — the conclusion ot
St Paul (1 Cor, ii, 9) that these things, though beyond human reach, are revealed
to Christians by God through His Spirit. The passage itself which Hegesippus has
in view may be not St Paul's quotation, but Isaiah lxiv. 4 ; and he must be ob
jecting to some application of it. [So Lightfoot, Galat. 2nd ed., p, 320.] But
even apart from this, even if it is Paul's quotation which Hegesippus has in view,
the argument he uses ((jidTif)v p,EV E?pi()a!3at TauTa) may refer to the Gnostic ap
plication, not to the words of Paul. Without dwelling on a subject where want
of information makes conjecture so easy and so insecure, we may say that the
attempt (of Baur &c.) to make out Hegesippus an Ebionite is amazing, when
Eusebius's description of him as a pillar of orthodoxy, and his own account of
himself as refreshed by the common faith of the church in Corinth and elsewhere
are kept in mind.

TATIAN. IRENAEUS. 129

5. Tatian.
Clem. Alex. Strom. III. 550. KararqixEi 8s rig ysviaecog
cpdaqrfjv '/at anoXXvfiivyv Xiycov '/at ^idtsrai rig int rs'/vo-
7iottag Xiycov slqyxivai rdv 2coryqa' 'Ent yfjg ftfj dyaavqlCeiv
'onov afjg '/at ^qwaig dcpaviCei. (Mat. vi. 19; Luke xii. 33.)
Ibid. 551. 'Ofioiwg 8i '/d'/slvo '/Ofiitovat^ rd qyrdv, ol v'lot
rov atwvog i'/sivov, rd nsqt vsxqcHv avaGrdaswg, o'vrs yafiovaiv
o'vrs yufiitovzai. (Mat. xxi. 30.)
6. Irenae.us.
^ Td '/azd Mardalov siayyiXiov nqdg 'lovdaiovg iyqdcprj' n'v-
TOi ydq snsdvfiovv ndvv acpddqa ix aniqftarng Aa(it8 Xqiazov.
'0 de Mardalog, '/at sn fidXXov acpo8qoTiqav sycov rfjv zoiauzqv
i7Tidvfiiav, navroicog s'ansv8E nXyqocpoqiav naqixsiv aizolg, cog
s'ly ex aniqfiarog Aa(ii8 b Xqiardg' did '/at dnd rfjg ysviasiog
airov yq^aro.
Adv. haeres. III. 9. § 1. Matthaeus enim apostolus, unum
ct eundem sciens Deura, qui promissionem fecerit Abrahae, fac
turura se semen ejus quasi Stellas coeli, qui per filium suum
Christura Jesum a lapidum cultura in suam nos agnitionem vo-
caverit, uti fieret, ''qui non populus, populus; et non dilecta, di
lecta;" ait Joannem praeparantera Christo viam, his qui in car-
iiali quidera cognatione gloriabantur, varium autera et omni ma-
litia corapletura sensura habebant, eam pcenitentiam, quae a raa-
litia revocaret, annuntiantera dixisse: "Progenies viperarum, quis
vobis monstravit fugere ab ira ventura? Facite ergo fructum
dignum poenitentiae. Et nolite dicere in vobis ipsis: Patrem ha
beraus Abraham: dico enira vobis, quoniam potens est Deus ex
lapidibus istis suscitare fihos Abrahae." (Mat. iii. 7 &c.) Poo-
nitentiara igitur eis eam, quae esset a malitia, praeconabat, sed
non alterum Deura annuiitiabat, praeter eura qui fecisset promis
sionem Abrahae, ille praecursor Christi; de quo iterum ait Mat
thaeus, similiter autem et Lucas: "Hic enim est qui dictus est
« The Eneratites.
' From Possini Catena Patrum in Matthaeum (Stieren, I. 842), 9

130 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
a Domino per prophetam: vox clamantis in deserto, Parate viam
Domini, rectas facite seraitas Dei nostri. Oranis valhs iraplebi-
tur, et oranis mons et collis huraihabitur, et erunt tortuosa in
directa, et aspcra in vias planas: et videbit oranis caro salutare
Dei." (Mat. iii. 3; Luke iii. 4 &c.)
B. III. 9. § 2. 3. Iterura autera de Angelo dicens Mat
thaeus, ait: "Angelus Doraini apparuit Joseph in soranis." Cu
jus Doraini, ipse interpretatur: "Uti adirapleatur quod dictum
est a Domino per prophetam: Ex Aegypto vocavi filiura meum.
Ecce virgo in utero accipiet, et pariet filium, et vocabunt nomen
ejus Emmanuel, quod est interpretatura : Nobiscum Deus." De
hoc, qui est ex virgine Emmanuel, dixit David: "Non avertas
faciem Christi tui. Juravit Dominus David veritatera, et non
spcrnet^ eura, de fructu ventris tui ponam super sedera tuam."
(Ps. cxxxi. 10, 11.) Et iterum: "Notus in Judaea Deus, et factus
est in pace locus ejus, et habitaculum ejus in Sion." (Ps. Ixxv. 2.)
Unus igitur et idem Deus, qui a prophetis praedicatus est, et ab
evangelio^ annuntiatus, et hujus filius qui ex fructu ventris Da
vid, id est, ex David virgine, et Emmanuel: cujus et stellam Ba
laam quidem sic prophetavit : " Orietur Stella ex Jacob, et surget
dux in Israel." (Num. xxiv. 15.) Matthaeus autem Magos ab
Oriente venientes ait dixisse: "Vidimus enim stellam ejus in
Oriente, et venimus adorare eum:" deductosque a Stella in do
mum Jacob ad Emraanuel, per ea quae obtulerunt munera osten-
disse, quis erat qui adorabatur : myrrhara quidem, quod ipse erat,
qui pro mortali humano genere raoreretur et sepeliretur: aurum
vero, quoniam Rex, "cujus regni finis non est;" thus vero, quo
niam Deus, qui et notus in Judaea factus est, et manifestus eis,
qui non quaerebaut eum. Adhuc ait in baptismate Matthaeus:
"Aperti sunt ei coeh, et vidit Spiritum Dei, quasi colurabara vc-
nientera super eura. Et ecce vox de coelo, dicens: Hic est filius
meus, in quo mihi bene coraplacui."
III. 16. § 2. Sod et Matthaeus unum ct eumdem Jesum
Christum cognoscens, eam quae est secundum hominem genera
tionem ejus ex virgine exponens, sicut promisit Deus David, ex
fructu ventris ejus excitaturura se aeternum regem, multo prius
^ Or dispernet.
° Or Ab angelo.

IRENAEUS. ATHENAGORAS. 131
Abrahae eandem faciens promissionem, ait: "Liber generationis
Jesu Christi, filii David, filii Abraham." Dehinc ut hberaret raen-
tera nostram a suspicione, quae est circa Joseph, ait: "Christi
autem gcneratio sic erat. Cura esset desponsata mater ejus Jo
seph, priusquam convenirent, inventa est in utero habens de Spi
ritu Sancto." Dehinc cura Joseph cogitaret dimittere Mariam,
quoniara praegnans erat, adsistentera ei angelum Dei, dicentem:
"Ne tiraucris assumere Mariam conjugem tuara: quod enim habet
in utero, de Spiritu Sancto est. Pariet autem filium, et vocabis
nomen ejus Jesum: hic enim salvabit populum suum a peccatis
suis. Hoc autem factum est, ut impleretur .quod dictura est a
Domino per prophetam: Ecce virgo accipiet in utero, et pariet
filium, et vocabunt nomen ejus Emmanuel, quod est, Nobiscum
Deus;" manifesto significans, et eam proraissionera, quae fuerat
ad patres, irapletara, ex virgine natura filiura Dei, et hunc ipsum
esse salvatorem Christum, quem prophetae praedicaverunt: non
sicut ipsi dicunt, Jesum quidem ipsura esse, qui ex Maria sit
natus, Christura vero qui desuper descendit.
7. AtIIE:\AG0RAS. '
Legatio, c. 1. Oi fidvov fifj dvrinaisiv, ovdi fifjv 8i'/dtsadai
rolg dyovat '/ai dqndtovaiv fjfidg fisfiad-qxdrsg , dXXd rolg fiiv,
xav xaTa '/dqqyg nqoanyXaxi'C.wai, '/at rd 'srsqov naisiv naqixsiv
rfjg '/scpaXfjg fiiqog, rolg de, ei tov yi'i^dva acpaiqnlvro, sni8i8d-
vai '/at rd Ifidnov. (Mat. v. 39, 40.)
Ihid. c. 11. 'Enst xat 8t avrwv riov 8nyfidTwv otg nqoaiyo-
fiEv, oi'/ dvdqwnt'/olg ovatv, dXXd dsocpdroig '/at dEo8i8d'/TOig,
nsiaai vfidg, fifj wg nsqt dd-iwv sysiv, 8vvdfiEda. Tivsg ovv
yfiiHv ol XdyoL oig svzqscpdfisda; Aiyco vfilv dyandrs rovg sy-
d-qnvg vfiwv, siXoyslrs rovg '/araqwfiivovg, nqoas-vysads vniq riov
' Athenagoras, " an Athenian, a philosopher, and a Christian," presented his
Apology (perhaps in person, for its title is TirpEopsto, embassy) to " the Emperors
Marcus Aurelius Antoninus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus," in the year A,D, 176
or 177, Such, at least, seems to be the most probable account. As the extracts
show, his object was to vindicate the personal character of Christians ; and heing,
as his style shows, a man who conld justly claim to be both philosopher and
Christian, he was well fitted to prevail upon the imperial philosopher to regard
the disciples of Jesus Christ with favour. He was naturally led to quote the
Sermon on the Mount.

132 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
dtwxovTWv iifiag, 'onwg yivrjads vlot rov narqdg vfiwv rov sv rolg
oiqavolg, og tov ijXiov airdv dvariXXst int novyqovg '/at aya-
dovg '/at ^qiyst snt Sr/aiovg '/at d8i/ovg. (Ma,t. v. 44, 45.)
Ibid. c. 12. Mixqi roaoirov de cpiXavdqwndraroi wars fiy
fiovov ariqysiv rovg cpiXovg, {'Edv ydq dyandrs, cpyat, rovg dya-
ndvrag xat 8avEi^ETS rolg 8avEi'C,ovaiv vfilv, riva fiiaddv 's^srs;)
TOiovToi de ^|ttetg b'vTeg -/at rdv roiovrov ^lovvrsg §iov, 'iva xqt-
drjvai 8iacpvywfiEv, dniarovfisda d-soas^slv; Tavra fiiv ovv fit-
xqd dnd fisydXwv -/at dXiya dnd noXXwv, 'iva fifj int nXsiov
vfilv svoxXoiyfisv. (Mat. v. 46, 47.)
Ibid. c. 32. Kat ydq oirog ry dvyarqt '/ard XQ^Cf^ov sfiiyrj,
§aaiXEvaai idiXwv xat i'/di'Arjdfjvai. 'Hfislg de rnadvrov d8idcpo-
qoi slvai dniyofiEV, cog fiy8i 18e1v yfilv nqdg inidvfiiav i^slvat.
'0 ydq (IXincov, cprjat, yvval'/a nqdg rd snidvfiyaai airfjg, ydq
fisfioixEV/EV EV TJJ '/aqdicx airov. (Mat. v. 28.)
8. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. III. 13-14. 'H de siayyiXiog cpcovfj inirazi-
•/toTsqov 8i8da'/£i neqt dyvsiag Xiyovaa' Hag b tdwv yvval'/a
dXXorqiav nqdg rd inidvfifjaai avrfjv 'fjdrj Sfioiysvaev avzqv sv
rfj xaq8ia airov. Kat 6 yafiwv, cpqaiv, dnoXeXvfiivrjv ano av-
dqdg jioixs'vst, '/at og dnoXvsi yvvar/a naqs'/rdg Xoyov noq
vsiag notsi airfjv fioixEvdfjvai. "En 6 2oXofiwv cprjai' 'Anodrjaei
Tig nvq sv Ifiarioj, rd de Ifidrta airdv oi '/ara'/avast; y nsqi-
nar'Tjasi rig in' dvdqd'/wv nvqdg, rovg 8i nddag oi '/ara'/avaei;
Ovrwg b elanoqsvdfisvog nqdg yvval'/a fjnavdqov oi'/ adqjiody-
asrai. Kat tov fiy fidvov fjfidg sivoslv rolg bfiocpvXoig, cog oiov-
rai Tivsg, 'Haa'iag 6 nqocp'fjzqg s'cpq' E'inars rolg fiiaovaiv vfidg
'/at rolg ^dEXvaaofiivoig , 'ASsXcpot fjfiibv sars, 'iva rd 'dvofia Kv
qiov do^aadjj xat dcpdy sv ry eiipqoavvy airdv. Td 8i evayyi
Xiov 'Ayandre, cprfit, rovg sydqavg vficov, xai nqoasixsads vniq
rdv snyqEatovrcov vfidg. Edv ydq dyandrs rovg dyandvrag ijfiag,
nolov fuaddv syers; rovro xat ol Xyarat, '/at ol TsXdJvat noiovai.
Tovg de noiovvrag to ayaddv 8i8da'/st fiy xavxdadai, 'iva fifj
dvdqwndqea/oi waiv. My yvwrw ydq, cpyatv, y y^iq f^ov fj dqi-
areqd, ri noiel fj ysiq aov fj 8s^id. (Mat. v. 28, 32, 44, 46 ; vi. 3.)

PANTAENUS. 133

9. Pantaenus.
Eus. H. E. V. 10.' Hyslro ds rqvr/avra rfjg rdv niardv
avrndt 8iarqt(ifjg avfjq '/ard nai8Eiav sni8o^draTog, ovofia ainp
Havraivog, i^ aqyaiov s'dovg 8i8aa'/aXsiov rdv Isqdv Xdywv
7caq avroig avvsariorog, o xai eig fjfidg naqazsivsrai, xat nqdg
rdv iv Xdycjj xai rjj nsqt rd dsla anov8jj 8vvardv avy/qorsladat
naqsiXycpafiEv. Ev 8s rolg fidXiara '/az' i'/slvo '/aiqov 8LaXdfi-
rpai Xoyog sysi rdv 8E8yXwfiivov, oia /at dnd cpiXoadcpov dycoyqg
TCOV '/aXovfiivwv 2roi'/dv wqficofiivov. Toaavryv 8' ovv cpaatv
avrdv i'/dvfiordry diadiasi nqodvfiiav nsqt rdv dsiov Xoyov sv-
8£i^aadai, wg '/at '/yqv'/a rov '/ard Xqtardv siayysXiov rolg in'
avarnXfjg s'dvsaiv avadsiydfjvai, fiiyqt rfjg 'Iv8wv aTSiXdfisvov yyg.
Haav ydq slain rdrs nXsiovg siayysXiarat rov Xoyov, svdsov
tfjXov anoaroXt'/ov fiififjfiarog avvsiacpiqsiv in' ai^qast '/at ol'/o-
8ofijj rov dsiov Xdynv nqofiydovfisvoi. 'Qv sig ysvdfisvog xat 6 Hav
raivog, '/at sig 'ivdovg iXdslv Xiysrat' s'vda Xcryog svqslv airdv
nqocpddaav - rfjv airov naqovaiav rd '/ard Mardalov siayyiXtnv
naqd naiv airddi rdv Xqiarov insyvw'/daiv, otg BaqdoXofialnv
rdv dnoardXcov sva '/rjqv^ai airolg rs 'E§qaiwv yqdfifiaai rfjv
rov Mardalov xaraXslifJai yqaipfjv, yv '/at ad^sadat sig rdv. 8rp
Xovfisvov xqdvov. '0 ys fiyv Havraivog int noXXolg xaroqddfiaai,
rov '/ar' 'AXs^dvdqsiav TsXsvrciiv fjyslrat 8i8aa'/aXEiov, Cday cpcovy
'/at 8id avyyqafifidrwv rovg twv dsicov 8oyfidrcov dyaavqovg vno-
fivqfiarit,dfisvog. Hieronym. script, eccl. c. 36. (Pantaenus in India) reperit,
Bartholoraaeum de duodecira apostolis adventura Domini nostri
Jesu Christi juxta Matthaei evangelium praedicasse, quod He
braicis litcris scriptura revertens Alexandriara secura retulit.
• This testimony is valuable as being independent of that of Papias and
those who follow him. By India it is supposed that Southern Arabia is denoted.
Pantaenus flourished in the end of the second century, and was the teacher of
Clem, Alex. Eusebius has been speaking of the first year of the reign of Com
modus (c, 9), and it was at that date (A,D. 192) therefore that, according to
hira, Pantaenus was the head of the Alexandrian School, There is difficulty in
understanding what is meant by teXeutuv in the last sentence of our extract,
because Clement succeeded Pantaenus about A,D, 189. Was Pantaenus twice at
the head of the School, before and after his missionary tour?

134 gospel of matthew.
10. Clement of Alexandria.
Strom. I. 409. 'Ev de rep '/ard Mardalov siayyEXici) y dnd
'A^qadfi ysvEaXoyia fiiyqt Maqiag rfjg firjrqdg 'iov Kvqiov nsqat-
omat' yivovzat ydq, cpyatv, dnd 'A^qadji ewg Aa^iS ysvsat 8e-
xariaaaqsg, xat dnd Aa^td scog T^g fierot'/eaiag Ba^vXcovog ys
vsat 8sxaTiaaaqEg , xat dnd rfjg fisroi'/saiag BafivXdvog ewg rov
Xqiarnv bfioiwg dXXai ysvsat ds'/ariaaaqsg.
11. Tertullian.
Adv. Marcion. V. 9. Nos edimus evangelia (de quorum fide
aliquid utique jara in tanto opere istos confirraasse deberaus)
nocturna nativitate declarantia Dominum, ut hoc sit ante lucife-
rum, et ex Stella Magis intellecta, et ex testiraonio angeli, qui
nocte pastoribus annuntiavit natura esse cura maxime Christum,
et ex loco partus, in diversorium enim ad noctem convenitur.
Fortasse an et mystice factum sit ut nocte Christus nasceretur,
lux veritatis futurus ignorantiae tenebris.
Be carne Christi, c. 20. Sed bene, quod idem dicit Mat
thaeus originera Doraini decurrens ab Abrahara usque ad Ma-
riara, "Jacob," inquit, "generavit Joseph, virum Mariae, ex qua
nascitur Christus."
Ibid. c. 22. Ipse inprimis Matthaeus, fidelissimus evangelii
coraraentator, ut coraes Domini, non aliam ob causam, quam ut
nos originis Christi carnalis compotes faceret, ita exorsus est:
"Liber geniturae Jesu Christi, filii David, fihi Abraham."
12. The Clementine Homilies.'
Hom. III. 52.^ 'Enst ovv oiqavov '/at yfjg etl avvsardrcov
• Although the Clementine Homilies are inore largely quoted afterwards
when the relation of Heretics and of Judaeo-Christian sects to the Church falls
to be considered, there are some references given here in order that the catena
of Testimonies may be more complete. For a discussion of the place and influence
of the Clementines see Introduction. The Latin forra of the Christian Romance
— the Recognitions — seems on many grounds to be less valuable for our purpose
than that from which we quote — tbe Homilies,
^ In this passage are instances of verbatim agreement (Mat, xi. 28), almost
complete agreement (Mat. xv. 13; John x, 27) and of an echo of a passage in the
Gospel (John x, 9), The whole is a specimen of the style of the Homily.

THE CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 135
naqfjXdov dvaiai, ^aaiXelai, al ev yevvyrolg ywai'/dv nqocpyrelai,
•/at oaa roiavra, dg ov/ 'ovra Qeov nqoardyftara, svdsv yovv Xiysi '
Haaa cpvrsia, yv ovx icpvrsvasv b narfjq b oiqdvtng,
ixqiKwdfjasrai (Mat. xv. 13). Aid rovro airdg dXyd'qg iov
nqocpyrrjg eXsysv Eyco slfit fj nvXq rfjg Ccofjg' b dt' ifiov slasq-
xdfisvog slaiqysrat sig rfjv twfjv (John x. 9), tug oi'/ ovayg sriqag
rfjg acoCsiv 8vvafiivTjg 8i8aaxaXiag. Aid '/at i^da Xiywv Jsvrs
nqog fis 7Tccvrsg ol '/ontwvrsg (Mat. xi. 28) rovrianv ol ryv
aX'fjdsiav 'CjjrovvTsg '/at fiy Evqiaxovzsg aizfjv '/at ndXiv Td
ifid nqd(3aTa d'/o'vst rrjg ifiyg cpcovyg (John X. 27). Kat
dXXoTE' Zqrslrs xat Evqiaxsrs (Mat. vii. 7) cog fifj nqodfjXwg
-/Eifiivyg rfjg dXydsiag.
Hom. VIII. 4. AXXd '/at noXXot, cpyatv, '/Xyrot, oXi-
yot de ex^exTOi. (Mat. xx. 16.)^
Hom. XVIII. 15. Kat 6 2ifiwv int rovrciJ dyava'/r-qaag s'cpq'
Tdv adv 8i8daxaXov alriw slnd-vra' 'E^o fioXoyovfiai aoi,
Kvqis rov oiqavov '/at rfjg yyg, on dnsq yv xqv7crd
aocpolg, ansxdXvxpag aird vynioig d-yXdCovaiv . . . ivdi-
yerai ydq airov eivat rov 8yfitovqyov rd '/qvnrd a EXsysv, rcTi
'/at rdv 'Haatav slnslv 'Avoi^io rd ardfia finv iv naqa-
^oXalg xat i^sqsv^Oftai xs'/qvftfiiva dnd xara^oXyg
'/da fiov (Mat. xi. 25; xiii. 35).
Hom. XIX. 2. Kat dXXy nov oida airdv slqq'/dra' Ei b
Saravdg rdv 2aravdv s'/^dXXsi, icp' savrdv ifisqiady,
ndg ovv airov arfjay y ^aatXeia; (Mat. xii. 20) . . . Mfj
doTE nqdcpaaiv rip novyqip. 'AXXd '/at avfi^ovXsvwv E't'qrj-/sv "Earco
vfidv rd vat, val, '/at rd o'v, ov' Td di nsqtaadv tov
tcov ix rov novyqov iariv. (Mat. v. 37; Jas. v. 12.) AXXd
'/at sv Jj naqidwxsv siyfj s'xofisv slqyfiivov 'Pvaai fjfidg dnd
rov novyqov. (Mat. vi. 13; xii. 26.) Kal dXXy nov slnslv
vniaysTo rolg das^ovaiv 'Yndysrs eig to ffxoTog to s^drEqnv
o fjroifiaasv b narfjq rip dia^dXq) '/at rolg dyyiXoig aizov. (Cora-
pare Mat. xxv. 30; xxii. 13; viii. 12.)
Hom. XIX. 7. OiStw ydq b d^svdyg fjfidv sins 8t8da'/aXog'
'E'/ nsqiaaEVfiarog xaq8iag ardfia XaXsl. (Mat. xii. 34.)
" See before, page 102, note 3,

136 gospel of matthew.
13. Origen.
(See before, pp. 8, 51, 81.)
Be Orat. Tom. I. p. 245. (Migne, vol. I. p. 509.) Hqdrov 8e
mm' lar iov, 'on fj Xi^ig fj intovaiov, naq' ov8Evt rdv EXXq-
vcov, oi'Te Tt5v aocpcov covdfiaarai, owe ev t^ twv Idiwriov avvrj-
dsicx rirqinrai, dX'^ soi'/E nsnXdad-ai V7td twv svayysXianov.
^wrjvixdyaav yovv b Mardalog xal b Aovxdg nsqt airfjg fiyda-
fidg 8iaipEqovayg, airfjv i^svqvo'ydzsg. Td bfioiov 8i '/at in aX-
Xwv ol sqfiyvsvovrsg rd 'E^qa'i'/a nsnonq'/aat.
Comm. in Mat. Tom. 15. c. 13. p. 670. (Migne, vol. III. p. 1290.)
Hqdaysg ovv sl dvvdfisda nqdg rfjv nqo'/Eifiivyv t,yryGiv '/ad iva
fiiv rqdnov o'vrwg dnavryaai, 'dn jiynors rd' Ayanyastg rdv
nXyaiov anv wg a avrdv, vnovnsiadat ' dvvarat , dg ovy vnd
rov ^wrfjqog ivravda ntiqEiXfjcpdai , dXX' vnd rivog rfjv axqi-
^Eiav fir) vofjaavrog riov Xsyofiivwv, nqoaTsdsladai. . . . Kat sl
fiiv fifj '/al nsqt dXXwv noXXcov dtacpcovia yv nqdg dXXyXd rdv
dvriyqdcpwv, wars ndvra rd '/cxrd Mardalov fifj avvadstv aXXy-
Xoig, bfioiwg 8i xat rd Xomd EiayyiXia, xgv affe/3ijg Tig e'8o^ev
sivai b V7C0V0WV ivravda nqoas^qicpdai , oix slqyfiivqv vnd rov
Acoryqog nqdg rdv nXovaiov rfjv 'Ayan-qasig rdv nXyainv
aov wg asavrdv, ivroXfjv vvvt di 8yXnvdrt noXXy yiyovsv fj
riov avriyqdcpwv 8iacpoqd, sI'te dnd qqdvfdag rivcov yqacpiwv,
SITS and roXfiyg tivwv fioydyqdg rfjg dioqddaswg rdv yqacpo-
fttvwv, SITS xat and rdv rd savrolg 8o'/ovvza iv rfj Stoqddast
nqoandivnov fj dcpatqo'vvrwv. Tfjv fisv ovv iv rolg dvnyqd-
cpoig rfjg HaXatdg Aiadfj/yg 8iacpwviav, Qsov dtdo'vTog, svqofiEv
Idaaadai, '/qtryqiq) %^j;ffa'|[tevot Taig Xoinalg Ex8daEatv' rdv ydq
dficpi^aXXofiivwv naqd rolg 'E§8ofirjXovra 8td rfjv riov dvriyqd-
cpcov 8iacpwviav, rfjv xqiaiv notyadfiEvot dnd rdv Xotndv s'/8d-
ascov, rd avvddov ir/sivaig scpvXd^afisv , xat rtvd fiiv co^sXiaafisv
iv np 'E^qaixcp fifj xsijisva, oi roXfi'rjaavrsg aird ndvry nsqte-
Xelv nvd 8e fisr darsqiaxwv nqoasdfj/afisv , 'iva 8fjXov y, 'ort
fifj /El fisva naqd rolg 'E§8ofi'rf/ovra ex tcSv ^oittcSv exdoffcwv
avficpwvwg rip 'E§qaixcp nqoasdy/afiEV xat 6 ^itev ^ovXdfievog
7rqdyrai aird' ip de nqoaxdnrst rd roiovrov, o ^ovXsrat nsqt
'zfjg 7iaqa8oxfjg aircov, " fifj, notyay.^
1 Origen here recounts the causes of difiference in the copies of the Gospels

ORIGEN. JULIUS AFRICANUS.- 137
Comm. in Joh. Tom. IV. p. 132. (Migne, vol. IV. p. 253.) "Exov-
rsg TOIVVV rag bfioiag Xi^sig tcDv rsaadqcov, cpiqs '/ard rd dvva-
rdv ideo fisv i8icc rdv vovv s/daryg '/at rdg diacpoqdg, dq^dfisvot
ano roi IVlardaiov, og xat naqaSidorai nqdrog rdv Xoindv
Toig 'E^qaioig exdedwxe'vai to svayyiXtov rolg ex nsqirofiyg 711-
arsvovatv. ^
Comm. in Joh. Tom. IV. p. 136. (Migne, vol. IV. p. 262.) '0
TOIVVV Icodvvqg cpyat naqd fiiv rolg rqiatv oi'/ slvai txavog, naqd
8i np Icodvvy oi'/ sivai d§iog.^
14. Julius Africanus.'
Eus. H. E. I. 7. 'Ensi8y 8i rfjv nsqt rov Xqiarov ysvsaXo
yiav diacpdqcog fjfilv 0 Te Mardalog '/at 6 Aovxdg siayysXiQdfis-
vot naqa8s8d'/aai , 8iacpwvElv rs vofil^ovrat rolg noXXolg, twv
Te niarwv 'sxaarog dyvoicje rov dXyd-ovg svqyaiXoyslv sig rovg ro-
novg nscpiXorifiyrai , cpiqs '/at rfjv nsqt tovtcov '/arsXdovaav sig
fjfidg laroqiav naqadwfisda, fjv 8t' sniaroXfjg 'AqiaTEi8jj, yqd-
He is even bold enough to suggest that the words, " Thou shalt love thy neigh
bour as thyself," may not be genuine, inasmuch as they are not in Mark or Luke,
The chief significance of his words lies iu the fact of so raany divergences in
MSS of the New Testament in his day. It shows that the Books had been in cir
culation for a long tirae before. See also Origen, Coram, in Rora, IV, 687 and
below. The testimony of Irenaeus is still more notable from the same point
of view (Book V, 30, 1), for at his earlier date the same phenomena of conflict
ing manuscripts were seen. See Scrivener, Int, to Textual Crit,, p. 449 for ex
amination of those facts. Origen says elsewhere (c, Cels, II, p. 77) that he "did
not know any that had altered the text of the Gospels designedly except the
followers of Marcion and Valentinus and perhaps also of Lucan us,"
* This passage says that Matthew wrote for Hebrews. In a passage pre
served by Eus. H. E. VI. 25 (see before, page 8) he says that the Gospel was ypajji-
(iaotv 'Eppai'xoi; ouvTETayfJiE'vov. He repeats the statement in our text in his Com.
in Joh, I. 6 (see before, p, 85). It is remarkable, however, that Origen never
makes any use of the said Hebrew original of Matthew. See his remarks on the
New Testament renderings of Hebrew (Acts xiii, 33) in the fragments left by him
on Psalms ii and iii, (Migne, vol. VI. P. 1. p. 575, &c.)
8 This occurs in the course of his minute comparison of the narrative of the
Evangelists regarding John the Baptist.
' Julius Africanus, a contemporary of Origen, lived in Palestine, is said to have
been Bishop of Emmaus, Author of a Chrouographia from the Creation to A,D,
221, which Eusebius and others quote. The following extract is from his letter
to Aristides, notable as an attempt to explain the discrepancy in the Genealogies
of Matthew and Luke. The attempt implies the acceptance of both at the time
he wrote. There is a remarkable correspondence between the extract as given by
Eusebius and the Hortatory Address to the Greeks which is ascribed to Justin
Martyr.

138 GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.
cpwv nsqt avficpwviag T^g ev Toig siayysXioig ysvsaXoyiag b fiixqip
nqoadsv fjfiiv 8yXwdstg 'Acpqi'/avdg ifivrjfidvsvas, rdg fiiv 8y rdv
Xoindv do'^ag wffav ^laiovg '/at 8isipEvafisvag dnsXiy^ag, yv de
at;TOg naqsiXycpsv laroqiav, rovroig airolg rolg q-yjiaaiv i'/ridi-
fisvdg '
EtchSi^ ydq rd ovojiara rmv yBvcSv iv 'laQcnljk '^qi&iiEiro y cpvon
rj voiim, ipvGsi (iiv, yvyaiov OTtegfiavog StaSo-](^ii, vo^ia Ss, szsqov
TiaiSoTioioviievov sig ovofia TilsvT^aavTog adcX^ov atixvov {ott yaq
o-iSsTCCo SidoTO ikTtlg avaaxdotcag Gacp'fjg ttjv fiilkovOav inayyiliav dva-
axdau ijiino-vvTO •^vi/riji, I'va avinXsinzov to ovofio; (isiv-g roiJ fiEzyl-
kaxoTog) • sTisl ovv ol ry yivBaloyia Tavrrj i(iq>sq6(i(voi , ot (isv du-
Si^civTO jcalg naTiqa yvyaicog, oi 6e stiqoig ficv iyevvq^rjaav , STCQOig
8e TcqoasTs&yaav xki^eei, a^icpoTSQcov ysyovsv 'fj fivi^fiy, xai tuv yzyiv-
vrjKorcov, xal tcov cog yeYivvyxormv. Oviiog O'vSiTSqov rav svayycliiov
ijiivScTai , xai cpveiv aqi-d-jiovv xal vofiov • STiSTiXaxti yaq akkr/koig ta
yivy, to' te ajto tov Sokoficovog , xal to utto tcv Nd&av, dvaazaai-
Giv ttTSKvcav, xal StVTSQoya^iaig xal avaOTaOtei, ansq^idzcov , cog St-
xaicog tovg avtovg Skkors cckkcov vofil^sad-ai , Tav (iiv Soko-vvtcov reo-
TSQcov, TCOV dh 'u-tiaqipvxcov • cog aficpoTiQag Taj dtrjyyaHg xvqicog akrj-
&tig ovaag inl tov 'Icoai^ip Tcokvnkoxcog fiEi/ , akk' axqi^dSg xarakd-elv.
"Iva 8e aacpig 13 to ksyo fisvov , tijv STtakkay^ rav ylviav Siyy^Goiiai
X.T.k. Hieron. de Vir. III. c. 63. Extat ejus ad Aristidem altera
epistola, in qua super Siacpwvia, quae videtur esse in genealogia
Salvatoris apud Matthaeum et Lucara, plenissirae disputat.
15. Eusebius.
(See before, p. 10, 87, &c.)
Ccrm. in Psalm. Ixxvii. 2. (Migne, V. 904.) 'Avrt ydq rov'
Odiy^ofiai nqofiXyfiara an dqxfjg, 'E^qalog wv b Mardalog ol-
'/sia i'/ddasL '/ixqqrat, slnwv Eqsv^ofiai '/sxqvfifiiva dnd '/ara-
(ioXyg, dvd' ov 6 fiiv 'A'/vXag' Ofi^qyaco alviyfiara s^ dqxydsv,
i'/8i8w'/sv 6 de 2vfifiaxog' AvajiXvaio nqo^Xfjfiara dqyala.^
' There may be doubt as to what oixECa ^xSoai; means. It is clear that
Eusebius means at least to intimate Matthew's independence of the translations
of Symmachus and Aquila, If we can suppose Matthew to have been the trans
lator of his own Gospel from Hebrew into Greek, this passage may be reconciled

CYRIL OP JERUSALEM. EPIPHANIUS. JEROME. 139
H. E. III. 24. Mazdaiog ftiv ydq nqdrsqov 'E(iqaioig '/q-
qv^ag, cog s'fisXXs xat icp' sriqovg livat, narqicj) yXdrry^ YQ^Wi
naqa8ovg rd xar airdv siayyiXiov rd Xslnov rjj airov naqovaicji,
rovroig acp wv EariXXsTO, did rfg yqacprjg dnsnX'Tjqov.
16. CvRiL OF Jerusalem.
Catech. XIV. p. 148. (edit. Paris. 1640). Mardalog 6 yqd
ipag TO siayyiXiov, 'E^qat8i yXdaay rovro syqaxpsv.
17. Epiphanius.
Haeres. I. t. 2. h. 30. (t. 1. p. 127). Kat 8ixovrat fiiv /at
airot rd '/ard Mardalov siayyiXiov , rovroj ydq '/at airot, dg
•/at ol xard K'fjqivdov yqwvrat fidvcjj. KaXovat de aird '/ard
'E^qaiovg, wg Ta dXydfj ianv slnslv, on Mardalog iidvog 'Efiqa'i-
ari '/at 'E§qai'/olg yqdfiftaaiv iv rjj Kaivjj Atad'fj/y inoifjaaro
rfjv TOV siayysXiov E'/dsaiv rs '/at xqqvyjia.
Ibid. (p. 425). Omog roivvv 6 Mardalog xara^tovrat rd si
ayyiXiov, cog s'cpyv, '/at dixaidrara yv.
Haeres. II. t. 1. h. 51. (t. 1. p. 426). Kat omog fiiv ovv 6
Mardalog 'Efiqal'/olg yqdfifiaat yqdcpst rd EiayyiXiov, xai '/yqvr-
rsi, xat dqxsrat oi'/ an' dqyfjg, dXXd dtyysiraL fiiv rfjv ysvsa-
Xoyiav dnd rov 'A§qadfi.
18. Jerome. 1
Be Vir. III. c. 3. Matthaeus, qui et Levi, ex publicano Apo
stolus, priraus in Judaea propter eos qui ex circuracisione cre-
with the others in which Eusebius declares him to have written his Gospel in
Hebrew, Compare Eus. H, E. III. 24 (see before, p. 87, where the whole passage
is given). See also H. E, V, 10 (before, p, 110),
2 See the context before, p. 110, extract from Eus, H, E. V. 10; and com
pare p, 87, H. E. HI. 24.
' On the various and varying testimonies of Jerome to the original form of
Matthew's Gospel see Introduction, ' Gospel of the Hebrews,' and see the passages
quoted in our text below, ' Gospel of Hebrews, ' It is remarkable that he does
not claim to have used it in making his own version: "Novum Testamentum
Graecae fidei reddidi, Vetus juxta Hebraicam retuli." (De vir, ill, c, 135) He
says elsewhere that he translated into Greek the Gospel which the Nazarenes and
Ebionites use, which is called by raany the authentic Gospel of Matthew; he says

140 GOSPEL OP MATTHEW.
diderant, evangeliura Christi Hebraicis Uteris verbisque compo-
suit. Quod quis postea in Graecum transtulerit, non satis certura
est. Porro ipsum Hebraicum habetur usque hodie in Caesariensi
bibliotheca, quam Pamphilus Martyr studiosissime confecit. Mihi
quoque a Nazaraeis, qui in Beroea, urbe Syriae, hoc volumine
utuntur, describendi facultas fuit. In quo animadvertendum, quod
ubicumque Evangelista, sive ex persona sua, sive ex persona Do
raini Salvatoris, Veteris Scripturae testiraoniis abutitur, non se
quatur Septuaginta translatorura auctoritatem, sed Hebraicam, e
quibus ilia duo sunt : Ex .^gypto vocavi filium meum (Mat. ii. 15),
et: "Quoniam Nasaraeus vocabitur (Mat. iii. 23)."
Praef at. in IV Evang. ad Bamasum (Vol. X. p. 661.) De
Novo nunc loquor Testamento, quod Graecum esse non dubium
est, excepto apostolo Matthaeo, qui primus in Judaea evangeliura
Christi Hebraicis hteris edidit.
Prolegom. in Matth. (Vol, VII. p. 3.) Primus omnium Mat
thaeus est publicanus cognomento Levi, qui Evangeliura in Ju
daea Hebraeo serraone edidit, ob eorura vel raaxime causam, qui
in Jesum crediderant ex Judaeis, et nequaquam Legis urabram,
succedente evangelii veritate, servabant.
Epist. (XX) ad Bamas. (Vol. I. p. 67.) Matthaeus, qui evan
gehura Hebraeo sermone conscripsit, ita posuit OSANNA BAR-
RAMA id est Osanna in excelsis etc.
Ad Hedih. (Vol. I. p. 820.) Mihi videtur evangelistara Mat
thaeum, qui evangeliura Hebraico serraone conscripsit, non tam
"vespere" dixisse quam "sero," et eura qui interpretatus est,
verbi arabiguitate deceptum, non "sero" interpretatura esse, sed
" vespere." ^
Comment, in lesaiam (Vol. III. p. 97.) Matthaeus autem et
Joannes, quorura alter Hebraeo, alter Graeco sermone evangelia
texuerunt, testimonia de Hebraico proferunt etc.
Comment, in Oseam cap. XI. 1. (Vol. VI. p. 123.) Cui nos bre
viter respondebimus : priraura Matthaeura evangeliura Hebraeis li-
teris edidisse, quod non poterant legere nisi qui ex Hebraeis erant.
here that he was allowed an opportunity of examining and taking notes from that
copy which was in the Pamphilus library at Cesarea, The references here are to
the Edition of Vallarsius 1734-42 (11 vols,),
2 Jerome is answering a question (No, 4) regarding the accounts of the Re
surrection in Matthew and John.

141
VII.
GOSPEL OF MARK.
foompare sections iv. and v.j
1. Papias.
Eus. H. E. III. 39. JTe^i Mdqxov . . . b nqsa^vrsqag s'Xsys'
Mdq/og fiiv sqftqvEvryg Hirqov x.r.X. (see before pp. 56, 57 and
notes there).*
' Early tradition consistently maintains a close connection between Mark's
Gospel and the Apostle Peter, From Papias downwards the testimony is clear.
He is said by Papias to have been the EpfirjvEUTiQ;, by Irenaeus to have been in
terpres et sectator, of Peter. Jerome gives a very concrete meaning to the word
ep(jiif)VEUTYi;, when he says that as Paul needed au interpreter to furnish him with
suitable Greek, and employed Titus in that capacity, so also Peter needed and
employed Mark, See the more general references to him as interpreter and fol
lower of Peter in the quotations in our text frora Papias, Irenaeus, and Tertullian,
But whatever was the special relation denoted by EpfjiTjVEUTific, it is admitted to
have been intimate. The expression in 1 Peter v, 13, Mapxo; o" ulo'; |J.ou, is sup
posed to indicate it. The tradition also is that "Babylon," of which Peter speaks
in the same epistle, was Rorae ; although it has been supposed in later times that
Peter wrote from the literal Babylon, to which he had gone with Mark for his
companion. Mark is said to have been the founder and first Bishop of the Church
in Alexandria ; and Jerome says, he suffered martyrdom in the eighth year of Nero,
(Hieron, de Vir, 111. c. 8.) 'I'here is also such warrant as tradition can give for
identifying him with the John Mark of whom we read in Acts xii. 12, that he
was the son of Mary who had a house in Jerusalem where brethren assembled
for prayer. To this house Peter went direct when set free from prison. We
read of "Johu surnamed Mark" going with Barnabas aud Saul on their raissionary
journey (Acts xii. 25), and of (apparently the same) John being the minister
(uTOip^TK];) of those Apostles (Acts xiii. 5) until he turned back from them at
Perga (Acts xiii. 13), This "John surnamed Mark" was the cause of dissension
between the two Apostles after the Council of Jerusalem (Acts xv, 37). Under
the name of Mark we have him (Coloss. iv, 10) joined in Paul's salutations as
the kinsman (avEiJjto;) of Barnabas, with a peculiar and significant reference to
certain directions which had been given for his proper reception and treatment.
The reference may be supposed to intimate that the Colossians were to regard
him as one whose present devotedness tp Paul atoned for his past defection. He
is also joined in the salutation (Philem. 24), In the last letter of Paul he is
longed for as "very useful for service" (2 Tim. iv, 11), This close alliance of
John Mark with Paul has led some to distinguish between him and the author
of the Gospel and "interpreter" of Peter, Hippolytus (in a fragment on the
70 Apostles) even distinguishes three : the Evangelist (Bishop of Alexandria), the
cousin of Barnabas (Bishop of Apollonia), and John Mark (Bishop of Bibloupolis),
But ordinary tradition leads us to believe that the same person — the Evangelist-
was the companion and helper of Barnabas and Paul and Peter. A later tradition
makes him one of the 70 disciples (Pseudo-Origen, Be recta in Deum fide, § 1),

142 GOSPEL OF MARK.
Ibid. 'laroqsl (sc. Haniag) '/at av ndXiv sTsqov naqdSo^ov
nsqt 'loiarov rdv inixXydivra Baqaa^^dv ysyovdg, t5g dyXrjzyqiov
cpdqfiaxov ifinidvrog '/at fiydiv oi^deg Sid tjjv tov Kvqiov /a'ptv
vnofisivavTog.'^ (Mark xvi. 18.) (See before page 56, line 5.)
2. Barnabas. Ciebieivt. Herkas.
Barnabas, c. 15. 9. Aid '/at dyofisv rfjv fjfiiqav rfjv dyddqv
sig sicpqoavvrjv, iv jj '/at 6 'iqaovg dviary ex vsr/qcov '/at cpaveqco-
dsig dvi^rj etg ot'^avoug.' (Mark xvi. 14.)
1 Clem. 15. Aiyst ydq nov Oirog b Xadg rolg x^iXeaiv jis

and Epiphanius (Haer. 51, 6) adds that he was one of those who "went away"
from Jesus (John vi. 66) until Peter brought him back. In our own day it is
usual to identify him with the "young man" who first impulsively followed Jesus
at the end, and with equal impulsiveness fled away. The quotations from Cle
ment of Alexandria and Origen and Tertullian give with varying details the same
testimony to the close connection between Peter and Mark's Gospel. His Gospel
shows that he wrote to Gentiles who were familiar with Latin words (vi, 27 ;
xii, 42, &c,) and who needed explanations of Jewish customs (ii. 18; vii. 1-4;
xiv, 14; XV. 6, &c.). Gregory of Nazianzum says, the Gospel was written in Italy
(which agrees with the oldest tradition), but Chrysostom says it was written in
Egypt. Augustine contradicts the statements as to Mark's Gospel being a written
record of Peter's preaching when he says that Mark came after Matthew as one
who abridged him and trode in his very footsteps. But when the reason is given
that Mark has little in common with John and very little peculiar to himself,
Augustine is overlooking the reraarkable fulness of graphic detail which dis
tinguishes Mark from Matthew even when the same incidents are recorded. (Aug.
de consensu Evangelistarum, I. 4.)
^ Barnabas, as Eusebius states in next sentence (see p, 56), is named in Acts
i. 23 as " Joseph called Barsabas. " Possibly the words in the text are a slip
for 'luCT-Qcp TOV xaXoufJiEvov Bap(ja|}pav. There may be in this passage a reference
to the promise in Mark; but there is no parallel use of words, and the mere
statement that an early disciple took poison without heing harmed does not af
ford much ground for the argument that its author had the passage of St Mark
in view. 1 See before, page 104, note 8, Though Reuss, Gesch, § 234, quotes it to
show that it contradicts both Matthew and Mark, Hilg, sees in it a contradic
tion of Matthew alone, adding however that Luke xxiv. 40 contradicts Acts i, 3,
The question is whether the Ascension of Jesus is here regarded as taking place
immediately after the Resurrection. But neither from Mark nor Luke is this a
necessary inference. The condensed narrative of Mark allows of an interval be
fore V. 14 and again before k. 19. Luke xxiv. 51 must be taken along with Acts
i. 3, where the author speaks of forty days of intercourse and teaching, although
in his earlier narrative there seems at first sight no room for such an interval.
In the sarae way Bamabas may be understood as declaring that each of the
two events took place ou the eighth day, with an indefinite time between. That
" the Ascension was regarded as the consummation of the Resurrection without
regard to the interval between them" (Speaker's Com.), scarcely vindicates the
historical accuracy of the Evangelists.

HERMAS. JUSTIN MARTYR. 143
Tifid, fj de '/aq8ia airdv nn^qco dnsariv dn ifiov.^ (Is. xxix. 13;
Mark vii. 6.)
Hermas, Mand. I. 1. Sim. IX. 25. »

3. Justin Martyr.
Apol. I. c. 16. p. 63 B. 'iig de xai tov Qedv fiovov del nqoa-
'/vvelv, ovrwg i'nsiaev slnwv "Msyiarrj ivroXrj ian, Kvqiov rdv
Qsov aov nqoG'/vvfjasig xat ainp fidvco XarqEvasig i^ 'dXrjg rfjg
xaq8iag aov, '/at i§ 'dXqg rfjg layiog aov, Kvqiov rdv Qsdv
tov norrjaavrd as." * (Mark xii. 30.)
Bial. c. 88. p. 316 C. Kat iXddvrog rov 'Iqaov snt rdv 'loq-
8avqv, '/at vofiitofiivnv 'Iwafjcp rov ri/rovog view vndqystv (Luke
lii. 23; Mat. xiii. 55) . . . '/at ri'/rovog vofiitofiivnv {ravra ydq
ra rs'/rovixd s'qya slqydCsro iv dvdqconoig wv, dqorqa '/at Cvyd,
8ta TOVTCOV xat rd rfjg 8i'/aioavvqg aififioXa 8i8da'/cov xat svsqyfj
§iov) . . . (Mark vi. 3.)''
Bial. c. 106. p. 333 B. Kat rd slnslv fisrcovofia'/ivat airdv
Hsrqov sva rdv anoardXwv , '/at ysyqdcpdat iv rolg dnofivrjfio-
vsvuaaiv avrov ysysvrjfiivov xat rovro, fisrd tov '/at dXXovg dvn
aSsXcpovg, vlovg Zs^sSaiov 'dvrag, fisrcovofiaxivat dvdfiazi rov
Boavsqyig, b ianv vlot ^qovrfjg, ayfiavzc/dv yv rov avrdv i'/sl-
vov sivai, dl' ov '/at rd inwvvfinv 'Ia'/co(i rep 'laqafjX snr/Xqd-ivzL
idddy. (Mark iii. 17.) »
' The quotation resembles Mark rather than the LXX. Hilg. reads aiTE'xEi-
* These passages are not given at length, because they do not seem to be
of sufficient importance,
' Justin, like Mark, has i^ oXt]; t:^; iox""' "O"' ""^ ^° *'*" ^^^ Luke x, 27.
But the coincidence is not verbal, since Justin (both here and Dial, c. 93, p. 321 A)
has only i^ oXy); ttq; xopSia; . Jaxuo;, while Mark has also vpux'^; , ¦ ,
6iavo(a;. Luke has the same nouns as Mark, but with ^v not i^ in the best MSS
for all save xap6(a;. The Scribe in his reply does not repeat the same words,
¦a. 33, * Mark alone calls Christ a carpenter. The Apocryphal Gospels (see Ev.
Thom. c, 13 &c,) expand the fact into details as Justin does. There is in Orig,
c, Cels. VI, 36 a strange denial that our Gospels ever call Christ textwv, Celsus
had stated that he was textmv tt^v T£X.vt]v,
' Justin's phrase a'Tcoiji. auTOu is without a parallel in his writings (see In
troduction on 'Justin's Memoirs'). If it be retained, we must suppose him to refer
to Peter (in which case he confirms the tradition that Mark's Gospel represents
Peter's preaching), or to Christ, Otto supposes that (1) auTOU is a mistake for
auTuv, and gives many examples of a similar confusion of singular and plural
genitives in MSS of Justin ; or (2) aTCOCJTe'Xuv has been omitted before auTOu,
In the latter case the passage would be parallel to that in c. 100 already quoted

144 GOSPEL OP MARK.

The following passages bear on the disputed verses at the close
of Mark's Gospel, c. xvi. 9-20.*
Apol. I. c. 39. p. 78 A. 'And ydq 'IsqovaaX-qfi dv8qsg 8sxa8vo
rdv dqidfidv i^fjXdov sig rdv '/da fiov, /at ovrot Ididrat, XaXslv
fifj 8vvdfiEvoi' 8id 8i Qsov 8vvdfiswg ifvfjvvaav navrt yivsi dv-
d-qconwv, wg dnsardXyaav vnd rov Xqiarov 8t8d^at ndvrag rdv
TOV Qsol) Xoyov. (Mark xvi. 20.)
Apol. I. c. 45. p. 82 E. Td ovv slqqfiivov "'Pdfidov 8vvdfiscog
i^anoareXel aot i§ 'leqovaaX-^fi" rcqoayyeXnxdv rov Xoyov rov
layjvqnv, ov and 'leqovaaXfjfi ol dndaroXot avrov e^eX-
ddvreg navrayov i'/'fjqv^av. (Mark xvi. 20.)
Apol. I. c. 49. ^.85 A Ol dnd'IeqovaaXfjfi s^sXddvrsg dnd
aroXot avrov sftTjvvaav rd nsqt avrov. (Mark xvi. 20.)
Apol. I. c. 50. p. 86 A. Msrd ovv rd aravqwdfjvat avrdv '/at
ol yvdqtfioi airov ndvrsg dniarqaav . . . xat sig ovqavdv avsq-
xdfiEvov Iddvrsg '/at niarsiaavrEg (Luke xxiv. 49) /at dvvafiiv
i'/sldsv airolg nsficpdslaav naq' airo'v Xa^dvrsg '/at sig ndv yi
vog dvdqdnwv iXddvrsg, ravra s8i8a§av -/at dndaroXoi nqoarj-
ynqsidyaav. (See Mark xvi. 19 ; John xv. 26, 27.)
Bial. c. 32. p. 249 E. "Onsq yivsrat e^ orov sig rdv ovqavdv
in which is recorded the change of Peter's name. (Mat. xvi. 18, but emphatically
Mark iii, 16.) These however are mere conjectures, and, as the passage stands,
aitOjJivifiijiovEUfJiaTa auTOu naturally mean Peter's Memoirs, which, however ellip
tical, is expressive enough. The reference of auTOu to Christ is contrary to the
usages of Justin, who designates the authors in the genitive following aTtOfivt)-
(j.ov£u|j,aTa. * Although it is not easy to show that Justin had Mark's Gospel specially
in view when quoting or referring to the Memoirs, or when narrating the events
of Christ's life, the foregoing are beyond dispute references to Mark's Gospel,
and those which follow refer to our Lord's Ascension and the enduing of the
disciples with power, in terms which sometimes suggest Luke and sometimes Mark
as tlie source from which they are taken. For a discussion of the genuineness
of the close of the Gospel after ^tpopouvTO yap see Burgon on "the Last Twelve
Verses of St Mark," The ascension to heaven of which Justin often speaks cannot
have been learned from Matthew's Gospel, It is to be noted however that Justin
often uses avE'pyonat and other words, while the word in Scripture is avaXajipavu.
As Tisch, N. T. p, 407 and Burgon p. 25 refer lo this, I may refer to all the
passages (besides Apol. I. c. 50, quoted in the text): Apol, I. c. 26, aviXEUUtv TOU
XpiOToC. Apol. I. c, 26 ; Dial, c. 39, Ei; T. oupavov av^Euatv, But Dial. u. 82,
ovoSov Tiiv Ei; oupavov. See Apol, c, 45, dyayzh tov XpioTov si; t, oupavov o
TCaTiJp. , In Dial. c. 32 we have avigXiQipSTi ; c, 38, avapEp^jx^voi, c. 85 avapavTo;,
c. 126, avapovTtt. In Dial. c. 132 the words are avEXiiXuioTO si; TOu; oupavoii;.
The only use of a'vaXoupdvu I can find is that in Dial, c, 32 (see Text).

IRENAEUS. 145
avsXrjCpdij fisrd rd i/ vs'/qdv dvaaryvai 6 fjfiirsqog Kvqiog 'irj
aovg Xqiardg /.r.X.
Bial. c. 53. p. 273 C. BIsrd ydq rd aravqwdfjvat avrdv ol
avv ainp 'dvrsg fiadqrat airov disa'/sSdadqaav, fiiyqig 'drov dvi
ary ex vex^wv '/at 7ci.n£i'/sv avrovg 'on ovrwg nqoenscprjtsvro
7i:Eqt avrov nadslv avrdv (Luke xxiv. 25, 44, 46) '/at ovzio nsi-
adivrsg '/at sig tijv ndaav ol'/ovfiivrjv i^sXddvrsg ravra iSiSa^av.
(Mark xvi. 20.) 4. Irenaeus.
B. III. 1. (See before, p. 67, and note there.)
B. III. 10, 6. Quapropter et Marcus interpres et sectator
Petri, initiura evangelicae conscriptionis fecit sic: "Initium Evan
gelii Jesu Christi Fihi Dei, quemadraodura scriptum est in Pro-
jihetis: Ecce, raitto angelum meum ante faciem tuam, qui prae-
parabit viam tuam. Vox clamantis in deserto: Parate viam Do
raini, rectas facite semitas ante Deum nostrum." ... In fine
autem Evangelii ait Marcus: "Et quidem Dominus Jesus, post
quam locutus est eis, receptus est in coelos, et sedet ad dexte
ram Dei." (Mark i. 1; xvi. 19.)*
B. III. 11, 7. Qui autem Jesum separant a Christo, et im-
passibilera perseverasse Christura, passura vero Jesum dicunt, id
quod secundum Marcum est praeferentes Evangeliura ; cura araore
veritatis legentes illud, corrigi possunt.^ (See before, page 67.)

» In Harl. MS 5647 (= Evan. 72) the scholium against Mark xvi. 19 is
Eipv^vaio; o" tcov airooToXtov TiXTf]aiov , i¦^ tu icpo; ra; alpE'oEt; y' Xo'yu touto
av^vEyxEv to ^¦otov oJ; Mapxu EipY)fjiE'vov. See Burgon's St Mark, p. 23-
^ It is uncertain to what sect Irenaeus refers here. Some (Grabe &c,) say
Cerinthus and his followers. But Epiphanius says that they, as well as the Ebio
nites, used only Matthew's Gospel. Baur and others (following De Wette) think
Mark xv. 37, 39 a text on which Gnostics would found, because the Centurion
was convinced of Jesus being the Son of God by the loud cry with which the
Spirit (that had been with Him) left Him on the cross. They quote Mark i. 26 ;
V. 7 ; ix, 26 in proof that this Gospel regarded a loud cry as the proof of a super
natural spirit leaving a human body. But while Schwegler regarded the Gospel
as Ebionite, Hilg, (Einl, 520) only speaks of "Gnostics" (without specifying
which sect) who would be conciliated by such a passage as Mark xv, 37, In
his "Evangelien Justins" (p. 281) Hilg. foUowed De Wette in calling the pas
sage Doketic. 10

146 GOSPEL OP MARK.

5. Athenagoras.
Legatio, c. 33. "Og ydq 'dv dnoXvay, cpyat, rfjv yvval'/a airov,
'/at yajiyay dXXyv, fiotydrat' o'vte dnnXvsiv inirqiniov fjg s'navai
Ttg rfjv naqdsviav, oms iniyafislv. '0 ydq dnoazsqdv savzdv T^g
nqoriqag yvvat'/dg, '/at sl ridvy/s, fiotydg san naqa'/s/aXvfifii-
vog, naqa^aivwv ftiv rfjv x^Iq^'' ^"^^ Qsoi', ort iv aq'/jj o Qsog
"va dvdqa snXaae xat fiiav yvval'/a. Avwv de tijv ffa^xog jr^og
adq/a xard tijv evwffiv nqdafii^tv elg rov yivovg '/otvcoviav.
(Mark x. 11, 6; compare Mat. xix. 4, 9; Luke xvi. 16, 18.)
6. Muratorian Canon.
(See before, p. 5.)
7. Clement of Alexandria.
Eus. H. E. II. 15. OiiTW dfj ovv i7ri8yfiyaavTog airolg rov
deiov Xoyov y fiiv rnfj Sifiwvog dnia^rj '/at naqaxqfjfia avv '/at
np dv8qt '/araXiXvro 8vvafiig , roaovro 8' iniXafiipsv ralg nov
d'/qoariov rov Hirqov 8iavoiatg sias^siag cpiyyog, dg fifj rjj sia-
dna^ Ixavdg s'ysiv dq'/sladat d'/oy, firj8i rfj dyqdcpcj) rnv dsiov
'/yqvy ftarog 8i8aaxaXiq, naqaxXyasat de navrniaig Mdq-/ov, ov
rd EvayyiXiov cpiqsrai, d'/dXovdov 'dvra Hirqov Xinaqyaai, wg
av '/at did yqacprjg vndfivrjfia T^g did Xc'ryov 7caqa8od-siaTjg avroig
'/araXsiipOL 8i8aa-/aXiag, fifj nqdrsqov rs avslvai, 'fj '/arsqydaa-
adai rdv dvdqa, xat ravrjj alriovg ysviadai ryg rov Xsyofiivov
'/ard Mdq'/ov svayysXiov yqacprjg. Ivdvra de to nqaydiv cpaai
rdv dndaroXov a7CO'/aXvipavrog ainp rnv nvsvfiarog yadfjvdi rjj
TCOV dvdqdv nqodvfiiijc , '/vqcoaai rs rqv yqacpfjv eig svrsv^iv ralg
s'/'/Xyaiaig, {KXrjfirjg sv s'/rci) nov vnorvndascov naqaridsirai rfjv
laroqiav, fiaqrvqsl de avrcp '/at 6 ' IsqanoXirrjg iniaxonog dvd
fian Haniag), rov 8i l\Idq'/ov fivqfiovsisiv rdv Hirqov iv rfj nqo-
Tsqce iniaroXfj, rjv xai avvrd^at cpaatv sn' airfjg 'Pwfiyg, ayfiai-
vEiv TE tovt' avrdv, tijv tto^iv T^OTTixtiiTe^ov Ba^vXdrva nqoasi-
ndvra did toutwv "'Aand^erat vfidg fj sv Ba^vXdvi avve'/Xexrfj
xai Mdqxog 6 vldg fiov."

CLEMENT OP ALEXANDRIA. HIPPOLYTUS. 147
Eus. H. E. VI. 14. To xaTa Mdq'/ov ravrqv ia'yjj'/ivai rqv
ol'/ovofiiav '/.r.X. (see before, p. 75).^
Clem. Alex. Adumb. in Pet. p. 1007. "Salutat vos Marcus
filius meus" (v. 13). Marcus, Petri sectator, palam pracdicaiite
Petro evangelium Romae, coram quibusdam Caesaieauis equiti-
bus, et multa Christi testimonia proferente; penitus (petitus) ab
eis ut possent quae dicebantur memoriae comraendare, scripsit cx
his, quae a Petro dicta sunt, Evangelium quod secundura Marcum
vocitatur. Sicut Lucas quoque et Actus Apostolorum stylo exe-
cutus agnosceret et Pauli ad Hebraeos interpretatus epistolam.
8. Hippolytus.
* Hippol. Cont. Haer. Noeti (Routh's Opuscula, 1.80). 'Ava-
Xafi^dverai [sc. XiOtffTog] eig oiqavovg '/at ex dei^twv 7raTqdg
'/aditerai ~/ai Lidvrcov -/at ve'/qcov 7zaqayivszai '/qiryg. (Mark
xvi. 19.)
Hippol. {7ieqt yaqiafidnov, Opp. p. 545). 'Iqaovg cprjat 7rdaiv
dfia, neqt rcov i§ airov did rov 7ti'ev ftarog 8i8ofiivcov yaqiafid
nov 2rjfiela 8i ring 7i:iareiaaaiv zama naqa'/oXovdrjaei' iv np
ovdfiari fiov 8aifidvia i'/jSaXovai' yXcoaaaig '/aivaig XaXyaovaiv
'dcpeig aqnvGi' xav d-avdaifidv ri 7cicoaiv, ov fifj avrovg jiXdipei'
i7it d^qwarovg yslqag iycidyaovat, '/at '/aXwg s^ovai. (Mark
xvi. 17.)
Hippol. sig rd dyia Qsocpdveia (Lagarde's Hippolytus, p. 38).
"Eqyerai b layvqdreqdg fiov ov ov/ elfit txavog rd vno-
8fjfiara ^aardaat, avrdg vfidg ji anr iaei iv nvsvfiar i
dyiio '/at 7cvqi. (Mark i. 7, 8.)
Hippol. Bef. Omnium Haeresium VII. 30. 'Ensiddv ovv Maq-
xi'wv y TWV i'/sivnv -/vvcov Ttg vXa'/rfj '/ard roi' 8yfiiovqyov, rovg
i/ rfjg dvzi'/taqadiaswg dyadov '/at '/a'/ov nqoq)Eqcov Xdyovg, 8e1
• See before, pages 67, 75, and notes, Clement's two traditions preserved by
Eusebius: the one (H. E. II, 15) that Peter sanctioned the Gospel, and the other
(H, E. VI, 14) that he was aware of its existence, but neither forbade nor en
couraged its publication, are inconsistent with each other and with the distinct
statement of Irenaeus III. 1 (sec page 67 and note) that Mark gave his Gospel
to the Church [lETa tiqv toutuv (sc, tou He'tpou xa\ tou llauXou) ?^oSov, The
proposed reading in Irenaeus is : (jiETa t'qv tou xara MarSatov £.\)<iyyi)t.io\i ?xSoaiv,
Mapxo; o" (ia3v]n]; x.t.X. which gets over the difficulty, but somewhat violently.
10*

148 GOSPEL OP MARK.
airolg Xiysiv, 'on rovrovg o'vte HavXng b d7tdaToXog, ovte Md q -
xog 6 xo^o/?oda'xTt4og dvr'jy'/siXav, {tovtwv ydq ovdiv iv r^
'/ard Mdq'/ov siayysXiqi yiyqanrai) '/.r.X.^
9. Tertullian.
Adv. Marcion. IV. 5. Marcus quod edidit evangeliura, Petri
affirmatur, cujus interpres Marcus. ^ Nara et Lucae digestum
Paulo adscribere solent. 10. Origen.
(See before, pp. 8, 52, 82, 85.)
11. Clementine Hoibilies.
(See Introduction for discussion. For passages in full, see next part of this work.)
The following references may meanwhile be ¦compared :
Hom. II. 19 (Mark vii. 25-30; Mat. xv. 28). Hom. III. 54 (Mark
X. 5, 6; Mat. xix. 8). Horn,. III. 55 (Mark xii. 27; Mat.
xxii. 32^; Luke xx. 38). Hom. III. 57 (Mark xii. 29).
Htm. XIX. 20 (Mark iv. 34).
' In the preface to the Gospel of Mark ascribed to Jerome in the Cod. Amia-
tinus it is said of Mark : Denique ampidasse sibi post fidem poUice-m dicitur, ut sa-
cerdotio reprohus haberetur. The sarae statement is found in an Arabic MS de
scribed by Fleischer: Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellsehaft,
Leipzig 1854, vol, VIII. p, 586, So far as this goes, it is in accordance with the
statement (Col. iv. 10) that Mark was avEil'io; Bapvoipa, If Mark was of Levitical
extraction, the amputation of his thumb may have been his device to escape of
ficial duty in the temple. Duncker (see Duncker's Hippol. p. 393, note) supposes
that Hippolytus wished to allude to the mutilated Gospel used by Marcion, and
wrongly ascribed it to Mark, But this is unlikely: and is inconsistent with the
text itself as given above, for the reference is not to Marcion's Gospel but to the
actual Gospel of Mark.
• See before, page 80, for the whole passage, Tertullian seeks to establish
the apostolic basis of the Gospels, Two were written by Apostles ; the other two
were mediately, if not immediately, of Apostolic authority. The chief interest of
this extract is that Interpres is evidently the translation of lp(/,iQV£UTiri;; so also
Jerome,
12. Eusebius.
(See before, pp. 10, 87, &c.)
Chronicon ad A. 2 et 3. Claud. Petrus apostolus natione Ga-

EUSEBIUS. EPIPHANIUS. JEROME. 149
lilaeus, Christianorum pontifex primus, cum primum Antiochcnam
ecclesiam fundasset, Romam proficiscitur, ubi Evangelium prae-
dicans 25 annis ejusdem urbis episcopus perseverat. Marcus
evangelista interpres Petri, Aegypto et Alexandriae Christum an-
nuntiat. Bemonstr. Evang. III. 5. Hirqog oi8s '/adrj/sv snt rfjv si-
ayysXiov yqacpfjv, 8t' siXa^siag vnsq^oXyv. Tovtov Mdq'/og yvd
qifiog xat cpoiryryg ysyovdg dnofivyfiovsvaat Xiysrat rdg tov Hs
rqov nsqt rdv nqd^scov rov 'lyaov 8iaXi^sig. . . . Hirqog de
Tawa nsqt savrov fiaqrvqsl' ndvra ydq rd 7raqd Mdq'/Cj) rov
Hirqov 8iaXi^Ecov sivat Xiysrat dnofivqfiovsvfiara.
H. E. II. 16. Tomov de Mdq'/ov nqdrov cpaatv E7tt rfjg
Alyvnrov arsiXdfisvov, rd siayyiXiov o dy xat avveyqdxparo xy-
qv^ai, i'/'/Xyaiag re nqwrov sn airyg 'AXs^avdqsiag avary-
aaadai.
13. Epiphanius.
Haeres. II. c. 1. h. 51. p. 428. Eidvg de fisrd rdv Mardalov,
a'/dXovdog ysvdfisvog 6 Mdqxog rip dyici) Hirqcji iv 'Pwfiy snt-
rqinsrat rd EiayyiXiov ixdiadai, '/at yqdipag dnoariXXsrai vnd
rov ayiov Hirqov sig rfjv twv Alyv7iTiwv ydqav.

14. Jerome.
' (See before, pp. 21, 100, &c.)
Be Vir. III. c. 1. Sed et Evangelium juxta Marcum, qui
auditor ejus (sc. Petri) et interpres fuit, hujus dicitur.
Be Vir. III. c. 8. Marcus discipulus et interpres Petri, juxta
quod Petrum referenteni audierat, rogatus Roraae a fratribus,
breve scripsit Evangelium. Quod cum Petrus audisset, proba-
vit ; et Ecclesiis . legendum sua auctoritate edidit, sicut Clemens
in sexto vnorvndaswv libro scribit. Et Papias Hierapolitanus
episcopus meminit hujus Marci; et Petrus in epistola prima, sub
nomine Babylonis figuraliter Roraara significans: "Salutat vos
quae in Babylone coelecta,' et Marcus filius raeus." Assurato
' Al, cum electa, collecta.

150 GOSPEL OP MARK.
itaque Evangelio quod ipse confecerat, perrexit Aegyptura, et pri
mus Alexandriae Christura annuntians, constituit ecclesiam, tanta
doctrina et vitae continentia, ut oranes sectatores Christi ad ex-
emplum sui cogeret. Denique Philo disertissiraus Judaeorura,
videns Alexandriae primam ecclesiam adhuc judaizantem, quasi
in laudem gentis suae librum super eorum conversatione scripsit.
Et quoraodo Lucas narrat, Jerosolyraae credentes omnia habuisse
communia: sic et ille quod Alexandriae sub Marco fieri doctore
cernebat, meraoriae tradidit. Mortuus est autem octavo Neronis
anno, et sepultus Alexandriae, succedente sibi Aniano.
E2). ad Hedih. c. 2. Divinorum sensuura raajestatera digno
non poterat (B. Paulus) Graeci eloquii explicare sermone; habe-
bat ergo Titum interpretem sicut et beatus Petrus Marcura cujus
Evangeliura Petro narrante et illo scribente compositum est.

15. Special Testimonies to close of the Gospel.
The evidence on the genuineness of the disputed passage
Mark xvi. 9-20 may be here summed up:*
Papias (Eus. H. E. III. 39) 'laroqsl (sc. Haniag) x.r.X. (see
before, page 137 and note 2).

' The genuineness of this passage was disputed by Griesbach, and subsequent
Editors have followed him, Tisch, (eighth edition) sums up the evidence with his
usual clearness and succinctness. He prefixes "Haec non a Marco scripta esse
argumentis probatur idoneis," The Manuscript Evidence against the verses is that
K omits them ; B omits them, but leaves a blank column which would have con
tained them, the scribe being apparently uncertain whether or not to put them
in (it is the only blank column in the whole volume) ;¦ L (which usually follows B)
closes a column with scpopouvTO yop and then at the top of the next column in
cludes in flourishes ipEpETE tcou xat TauTa . , after which it adds IlavTa 6£ Ta
TtapTiYYEXfjLEva tol; TCEpi tov icETpov auvTOiJiu; t^r]yyiKirt f M-Sfa 8e TauTa xat auTo;
0 t; ano avaroXif); xal o^pt 8uaEu; E^amOTtXsv fit auTuv to lEpov xat atpiJaprov
xit)puYp.a t TTi; atiovtou otoTiripta; f. And then, inclosed iu further "flourishes, the
scribe says EaTYjv 8e xat TOUTa tpEpoiJiEva [jiETa to EtpopouvTO yap (see Burgon's
Photograph, p. 112), This is all the MS evidence .against the verses, save that
some minor Codices of the Aimcnifin and Aethiopic and one of the Old Latin (k)
are on the same side. We may say therefore that X and B omit the verses (the
latter with some qualms) ; and that L has a view of its own, AU other MSS
(including ACD) contain the verses ; as do the Peshito, Cur. and Jerns, Syriac,
the Philoxenian text, the Sahidic, Memphitic, and Aethiopic, the Vulgate, all ex
tant Old Latin MSS except the one (k) mentioned above. There is therefore
an immense preponderance of authority in MSS and versions in favour of the

SPECIAL TESTIMONIES '10 THE CLOSE OF THE GOSPEL. 151
Barnabas, c. 15. 9 Aid '/at dyofisv x.r.X. (see before, page 137
and note 1).
Justin Martyr, Apol. I. cc. 39, 45, 49, 50; Dial. cc. 32, 53
(see before, page 145 and note 1).
Irenaeus, B. III. 10. 6: In fine autem Evangehi &c. (see be
fore, page 147 and note 1).
Hippolytus contra Noet. and nsqt y^q. (see before, page 142
and note 1).
Vincentius of Thibari (at Concil. Carth. VII A.D. 256): Ha
beraus regulam veritatis quam Dominus praecepto divino mau-
davit Apostolis dicens: Ite in nomine meo manum imponite, dae-
monia expellite. (Mark xvi. 17, 18.)
Gesta Pilati, c. 14 (Evang. Nicod. Pars I. K.)"EXsyEv rolg fia-
dqralg avrov' Hoqsvdivrsg eig tov '/nofinv U7tavra '/yqv^ars
nday rfj '/riasi ' b niarsvaag /.r.X. (Verbatira frora the N. T. to
•/aXdg f^nvaiv.) Then it goes on "iiTt rni: 'lyaov XaXovvrog nqdg
roig fiadyrdg avrov s'idofisv avrdv avaXrjcpdivza sig rdv ovqaiifv.
(Mark xvi. 15-18.)
Apost. Constt. VII. 7. Aafinvzsg svzoXfjv naq' aizov '/qqv^cti
zd siayyiXiov sig 'dXov tov '/dofiov. VIII. 1. 'Hfilv rolg dnoard-
Xoig fiiXXovaiv rd sva'/yiXtov '/arayyiXXsiv nday rfj '/ziasi.
Euseb. ad Marinura (Mai. 1847; Burgon p. 265.) In answer
to the first question put to hira by Marinus: iTcSg naqd fiiv np
verses. As regards the evidence of quotation by the Fathers it will be seen from
our extracts that in the second century (omitting Papias) Barnabas and Justin
seem to found upon the verses, Irenaeus certainly does. In the third century
Hippolytus (A.D. 190 to 227), the Acts of Pilate, seventh Council of Carthage and
Apost. Constt, (?) also use them. In the fourth century Eusebius throws doubt
upon them ; and Jerome subsequently (as his custom is in many things) repro
duces what Eusebius said, but in his own work as an Editor of the Bible re
cognizes and admits the verses. The only adverse testimony which we really
have therefore is that of Eusebius (if indeed he were not reproducing for the sake
of discussion some earlier writer). Eusebius and s, with the halfhearted support
of B, make a serious opposition to the genuineness of the verses ; but they cannot
overcome the solid mass of testimony in its favour, Olshausen (followed by Al
ford, &c,) supposes that in some old copy a leaf was torn off or lost; and, if
Tischendorf be right in ascribing this part of s to the scribe who wrote B, we
have an easy explanation of the testimony of these two MSS, as he would have
that defective exemplar before hira when making both copies, ^ But apart from.
conjecture as to this, it may be admitted that Dean Burgon has justified his boast
that " S, Mark's last Twelve Verses shall no longer remain a subject of dispute
among men," (Dedicition p, vi,) His book is a wonderful proof of concen
trated industry.

152 GOSPEL OF MARK.
Mardaloj oi/'e aa^fSdrcov cpaivsrat F.ysysqfiirog b Icorfjq, naqd de
7,f^;5 3ldq'/i>> nqot rfj fiia rcov aa^^drwv. Eusebius says: Tnvrov
8irTy dv s'iy y Xvaig' b fiiv ydq rfjv rovro ipdaxnvaav nsqixonyv
ddsTwv, sl'noi 'dv fifj iv dnaaiv airfjv cpiqsadai rolg dvnyqdcpoig
rov '/ard Maq'/ov siayysXiov' rd yovv d'/qi^fj rdv dvrtyqdcpcov
rd riXog nsqiyqdipsi T^g xard rdv Bldq'/ov laroqiag sv rolg Xo
yoig rov dcpdivrog vsavio'/ov ralg yvvaiSt xat slqq'/drog avralg'
"BIfj cpo^slads, 'lyaovv trjrslrs rdv Nataqyvdv." Kat rolg s^g
olg sniXiyst' "Kat dxovaaaat scpvyov, /at oidsvt oi8sv sinov,
Ecpopdvvro ydq." 'Ev rovrw ydq axeddv sv dnaat rolg dvnyqd
cpoig rov '/ard Mdq'/ov siayysXiov nsqiyiyqanrai rd riXog' rd
de e^^g anaviwg sv naiv dXX' oi'/ sv ndat cpsqdfisva nsqirrd av
Ely, '/at fidXiara sinsq 'syoisv dvnXoy'iav rfj rdv Xotncov svayys-
Xiarcov fiaqrvqia. Tama fiiv ovv s'inoi dv Ttg naqatrovfisvog
'/at ndvry dvaiqwv nsqirrdv iqcoryfia '/.r.X.'^
^Hieron. Epist. Hedih. quaest. 3. on Mark xvi. 9-20. (Opp.
t. Ill, p. 172.) Quae causa sit, ut de resurrectione . . . evangelistae
diversa narraverint. . . . Hujus quaestionis duplex solutio est.
Aut enim non recipimus Marci testimonium, quod in raris fertur
Evangeliis: omnibus Graeciae libris pene hoc capitulum in fine
non habentibus: praesertim cum diversa atque contraria evan-
gelistis caeteris narrare videatur. Aut hoc respondendum, quod
uterque verum dixerit.
Hieron. Bial. II. adv. Pelagianos, § 15. In quibusdam exem-
plaribus et raaxime in Graecis codicibus, juxta Marcum in fine
* Eusebius goes on to intimate that another man who could not take it upon
him to reject what he finds in the Gospels, might admit both readings; aud after
some confusing (and, as it stands, confused) reasoning, he says in answer to a
second question by Marinus that o'lJjE (raPPaTUV in Matthew's narrative ought not
to be understood as meaning the 'Evening of the Sabbath day,' but an advanced
period of the following night; and he thus makes out the narrative of Matthew
to be consistent with that of John, which says that Mary came on the first day
of the week while it was yet dark, Mark is identical with John, and in his
answer to Marinus's second question Eusebius gives an easy solution. Burgon sug
gests that in answer to the first question Eusebius was reporting the opinion of
some one else,
^ Burgon points out that the question and answer ascribed to Hedibia and
Jerome are in fact translations of what passed between Eusebius and Marinus, so
that we have not Jerome's own view in this passage. This is clear even in our
extracts (see extract above from Euseb, ad Marin., with note). In revising the
Old Latin version of the New Testament, Jerome allowed the verses to remain
at the end of Mark's Gospel,

SPECIAL TESTIMONIES TO THE CLOSE OP THE GOSPEL. 153
ejus Evangelii scribitur: "Postea quura accubuissent undecim,
apparuit eis Jesus: et exprobravit incredulitatem et duritiam
cordis eorum, quia his qui viderant eura resurgentem^ non cre
diderant: et illi satisfaciebant dicentes: Saeculum istud iniqui
tatis et incredulitatis substantia est, quae non sinit per immun-
dos spiritus verara Dei apprehendi virtutera: idcirco jara nunc
revela justitiara tuara."

154
vm.
GOSPEL OF LUKE/
(see before, sections i— v.j
1. Barnabas.
C. 14. 1. Nai. 'AXXd r-^ diadyxyv yv wfioasv rolg narqdat
8ovvai rip Xatp, sl de'dwxev CynHfisv. (Luke i. 73.)
¦ That the author of the third Gospel was also the author of Acts may be
regarded as certain. The tone and style, as well as the express claim (Acts i, 1),
ar^ accepted as decisive, Schleieimacher's breaking up of the whole narrative of
the Gospel into its constituent parts has borne much fruit — not as regards this
Gospel only — throughout this century, and his disciples are found in every land.
But nothing more is proved than Luke's own preface implies. The Book is an
avowed compilation of the testimonies of ministers and eyewitnesses. And, com
pilation though it be, there are marks of unity of authorship throughout. The
phraseology of the two books is strikingly similar, and afibrds a demonstration
that they are the work of a single author. On this Zeller (Acts, vol, II. p. 213, &c.
Engl, Trans,) may answer Schleiermacher, whose Essay on St Luke is well known
through Thirlwall's translation, (See also Schleiermacher, Einleitung, § 56 to
§ 79 and [for Acts] § 85 to § 90.) (See below, p. 159 note 1.) There is also
an elaborate account of Luke's vocabulary in Holtzmann, Die synopt. Evang,
§ 19. 9, The physician, the man of culture, and the man acquainted with sea
faring, though not a sailor, is seen in both works. In regard to this last point
see Smith (of Jordanhill), Dissertation ou the Life and Writings of St Luke,
prefixed to his 'Voyage and Shipwreck of St Paul' (1866), The first two chap
ters have been regarded by some as not genuine, but there can be no doubt that
Justin Martyr knew them, and there seeras to be an echo of them in Clement
and Barnabas, Marcion's Gospel is now admitted to have beeu later than Luke,
and to have been an adaptation of it, by mutilation. Though Tertullian's zeal
leads him to charge Marcion with corruption in some passages where it is now
clear that Marcion preserved the reading of older MSS of Luke than those in
Tertullian's hand, the assurance of the African Apologist that Marcion's book was
a mutilation of Luke is confirmed by recent investigations. The author of ' Su
pernatural Religion ' stands out as a solitary opponent in the mean time ; hut he
has a special regard for Marcion, whom he thinks "too able a man" (Sup. Rei.
II. 125) to have done his work so imperfectly as to lay it open to the well-
founded objections of Tertullian and others ! This may be regarded as an ex
pression of sympathy, but can scarcely be considered an argument.
That Lulte was Paul's close companion we know from the writings of both.
See below, notes on extracts from Irenaeus, Eusebius, and Jerome. That his
Gospel represented teaching similar to that of St Paul, can scarcely be doubted;
and, where they touch the same great subject, as in the account of the Lord's
Supper, Iheir words so closely correspond that the coincidence cannot be acci
dental, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen all associate Paul with the Gospel of his
friend and follower. But Luke's own Preface seems to be adequate reply to all
such fond imaginings. It is hard to believe that if Luke had the direct authority
of Paul for his narration, he would have failed to claim that authority in his

CLEMENT OF ROME. HERMAS. 155

2. Clement of Rome.
First Epistle.
C. 13. 2. (see before. Section V).
C. 46. 8. (see before. Section V).
C. 59. 3. Tdv ransivovvra fi^qiv vjzsqycpdvcov, rdv diaXvovra
XoyiOfiovg idvcov, rdv noiovvra ranetvovg elg 'vipog /at
rovg vipyXovg raneivovvra' (Luke i. 52.^)
Second Epistle.
C. 2. 7. O^TWg '/at b Xqiardg ydiXyaev acoaai rd dnoX -
Xvfieva '/at sacoasv noXXovg, iXdcov /at '/aXiaag fjfidg 'rjdq dnoX-
Xvfie'vovg. (Luke xix. 10, and 1 Tim. i. 15.)
C. 6. 1, 2. Aiyst 8s 6 Kvqtog' O^deig ol'/irqg 8vvaTaL
8vat xvqioig 8ovXsveiv. 'Edv fjfislg diXwjisv '/at Qscp 8ov-
Xsvsiv '/at fiaficov^ davficpoqnv fjfiiv iariv. (Lukexvi. 13; Mat.
vi. 24.) C. 8. 5.' Aiyst ydq b Kiqiog iv rip siayysXiiiJ • El rd fii-
'/qdv OV'/ sryqfjaars, rd fiiya rig Vftlv dcoasi; Xiyco ydq
Vfilv OTl 0 niardg iv iXaxiariii '/at iv noXXip ntardg
ianv. (Luke xvi. 10, 12.)

3. Hermas.
Mand. V. 2. 7. Eira 'orav dnoarfj [sc. to rqvcpsqdv nvsZfia~\
and rov avdqdnov s'/sivov crv xarnr/sl, yivsrat b dvdqwnog i/sl-
preface. But it is equally hard to believe that a Gospel written by Luke iu
Paul's life-time should be published without the sanction of the great Apostle
whose spirit it breathes, and whose very words it uses. We need not adopt the
" Tendency " theory, as though the book were a conscious compromise between
contending parties, or a fiction intended to teach Paulinism, when we agree with
Hilgenfeld that we have in the Third Gospel an antidote to Judaism proper and
to Judaissing Christianity, and a manifestation of the same truth of righteousness
by faith and that faith the work of the Holy Spirit as Paul teaches, (Hilgen
feld, Die Evv,, p, 220-223,)
' The whole of the first part of the prayer from which this is taken is like
a paraphrase of the Virgin's hymn in Luke's Gospel.
2 This is one of the many passages in 2 Clem, which may be referred to an
apocryphal source ; but it is perhaps sufficiently near to the words in Luke's
Gospel to be cited in our text. Iren, II, 34. 3 has " si in modico fideles non
fuistis, quod magnum est quis dabit vobis?"

156 ¦ GOSPEL OF LUKE.
vog xevog dnd rov nvsvfiazog rov di'/aiov, xat Xoindv nsnXyqio-
fiivog rolg nvsvfiaat rolg novqqolg d'/araararsi iv nday nqd^si
airov, neqtandfievog dds ¦/d'/slas dnd rdv nvsvfidrwv rdv no-
vqqdv, '/at oXwg dnorvcpXomai dnd T^g Siavoiag rfjg dyadfjg,
(Luke xi. 24-26.) 4. Protevangelium Jacobi. ^
C. 17. Ki'Asvaig de iyivsro dnd Aiyovarov ^aatXicog dno-
yqdcpsadat ndvrag rovg iv BydXsifi rfjg 'lovdaiag x.t.X.
5. Justin Martyr. ^
Apol. I. c. 16. p. 63 B. Hsqt de tou ave^ixaxoig eivat xai
vnyqertxovg ndat '/at doqyfjtovg a ecpy ravrd effTtv * Tcp Tvn-
TovTi aov rfjv a taydva, ndqeye '/at r-^v dXXrjv, 'xat rdv
a'iqovrd aov rdv "/irdva, 'fj rd ifidriov, fifj '/coXvayg.
(Luke vi. 29 ; compare Mat. v. 39, 40.)
Apol. I. c. 17. p. 64 E. 'iig b Xqiardg sfi'fjvvaev slnwv iit
nXiov s'dwxEv b ©eog, nXiov '/at dnaiTyd'Tjasrat naq
airov. (Luke xii. 48.)
Apol. I. c. 19. p. 66 B. Kat rdv fjfiirsqov 8i8da'/aXov 'lyaovv
Xqtardv syvwfisv elnovra' Td d8vvara naqd avdqwnoig
Sward naqd Qe^. Kai' My cpo^slads rovg dvaiqovv-
1 This apocryphal Gospel dates from about the middle of the second century.
Origen refers to it by name. Clem. Alex, seeras to refer to its narrative ; and
so does Justin Martyr, It contains c. 18 the statement of Christ's birth in a cave
which fills so large a space in early legend and in Christian art. It has many
internal marks of being a supplement to Luke's Gospel, written to counteract the
statements of Ebionites and others regarding the ordinary humanity of Jesns
Christ. See Tisch., Evang. Apocr,, Prolog', p, XIII,
1 In the following passages are expressions which show that Justin quoted
Luke's Gospel, (See this admitted: Davidson, Introd. to N, T. II. 22.) The
chief stress must however be laid on the incidents of our Lord's history — at the
Birth and the Passion especially — which Justin has noticed, and which are peculiar
to Luke. Some of the coincidences of expression are nevertheless striking, and
the list of them in the text might perhaps have been increased hy adding such
as Apol. I. K. 15. p. 62 C, where Justin has Luke's eJ; (jiETavoiav (not genuine in
the other Gospels) ; or Dial, o. 76, p. 301 D, where he has the i^dyonEV xaWnto-
(jiev of Luke xiii. 26, along with the TipoEqjiqTEuciaiJiEv of Mat. vii, 22; and Apol. I.
c. 66. p, 98 B, where he has touto notetTE si; tiqv avdjjivtiatv jiou (Luke xxii. 19,
compare 1 Cor. xi. 25). In all these cases Justin's way of blending his various
sources is strikingly seen.

JUSTIN MARTYR. 157
Tag Vfidg '/at fisrd ravra fifj 8vvafiEvovg rt notqaai,
sins, cpo^ydrjTE de tov fisrd rd dnodavslv 8 vvdfisvov
xat ipvyfjv '/at ad fia etg yiswav ifi^aXslv.^ (Luke xviii.
27; xii. 4; corapare Mat. x. 28.)
Apol. I. c. 33. p. 75 A. Avvafug Qsov insXdovaa ry naq-
divcj) insa'/iaasv airfjv, '/at '/vocpoqfjaai naqdivov ovaav 7tsnoiy'/s.
Kat o anoaraXstg de nqdg avrfjv rfjv naqdivov '/ar i'/slvo rod
'/aiqov EVTjyysXiaaro airfjv slncov 'iSov avXXyil.iy iv yaarqt
ex nvsvfiarog dyiov '/at ri^y vldv, '/at vldg vipiarov
'/Xyd'Tjaerai, xai xaXiasig to 'dvofia airov 'lyaovv, av
rdg ydq adasi rdv Xadv airov dnd twv dfiaqridv ai
rdv (compare Mat. i. 21), t5g ol dnofivqfiovsvaavrsg ndvra rd
nsqt TOV acorfjqog fjfudv 'iqaov Xqiazov idiSa^av.^ (Luke i. 35.)
Apol. I. c. 34. p. 75 E. Kdfiy 8i rig iariv sv rfj yioqq 'lov-
Saiwv, dniyovaa araSiovg rqid'/ovza nivrs 'IsqoaoXvfiiov iv jj
sysvvfjdy 'lyaovg Xqiardg, t&g xat fiadslv dvvaads ix rcov ann-
yqacpdv twv yevofiivwv int Kvqrjviov, rov viieriqov iv lov-
8aia nqdrov yevofiivov inirqdnov. (Luke ii. 2.*)
Bial. c. 76. p. 301 B. HdXiv iv sr iqotg Xdyoig 'scprj' Ai-
8cofii Vftlv s^ovaiav '/aranareiv sndvco 'dcpswv xat
G'/oqnicov '/at a/oXonsv8qdv xat e/ra'vw ndayg 8vvd-
fiswg TOV sydqov. (Luke x. 19.)
Bial. c. 76. p. 302 A. 'E^da nqd rov aravqwdrjvat' Jsl rdv
vldv roi' dvdqconov noXXd nadslv '/at, dnodoxifiaadfj-
vat vnd twv yqafifiariwv '/at Q)aqtaaiwv xal aravqco-
dyvat xat rfj rqiry fjfiiqcf dvaaryvai. (Luke ix. 22; com
pare Mat. xvi. 21; xx. 18; and Mark viii. 31.)
Bial. c. 78. p. 303 B. Oo^ydstg ovv [sc. 'Icoaycp'j oix i'/^i-
^Xrjxev airfjv, dXXd, dnoyqacpfjg ovaqg iv ry 'lov8aia rdre nqco
ryg int Kvqyviov, dveXyXidei dnd Na^aqir, s'vda I'pxei, elg
BydXeifi, odsv yv, dnoyqdxpaadat' dnd ydq rfjg '/aroi'/ovatjg
rfjv yyv s'/eivyv cpvXfjg 'lov8a rd yivog yv. (Luke ii. 1, &c.)
« The first part is almost identical with Luke; the second resembles Luke
more than Matthew, especially in ^(jtpaXEtv. The same passage is quoted in Clem,
Hom XVII, 5, and the parable of the unjust judge is there referred to as an en
couragement to the blending of fear with trust in God's justice and long-suffering.
8 See also Dial, c, 100, p. 327 C, quoted below in this section.
« See also (quoted under 'Matthew') Apol, I. .;. 46, p. 83 B, and (below) Dial.
K. 78. p. 303 D, for notice of Cyrenius and of the Birth,

158~ GOSPEL OP LUKE.
Bial. c. 78. p. 304^. 'EnsiSy 'Icoafjcp oix slxsv iv rfj xdfiy
E'/sivrj nov '/araXvaat, sv anqXaicii rivt avvsyyvg rfjg '/cofiyg
'/ariXvas' '/at rdrs aizdv ovtwv ixsl, iriro'/si fj Maqia rdv Xqt
ardv '/at EV cpdrvy airdv srsdsi'/si. (Luke ii. 7.)
Bial. c. 81. p. 308 B. "Onsq '/at b Kvqiog yfiiov sinsv, 'dn
O'vrs yafiijoovaiv ovrs yafiydfjaovrai, aXXd ladyyeXoi
saovrai, ri'/va rov Qeov rfjg dvaardaewg 'dvreg.^ (Luke
XX. 35, 36.)
Bial. c. 84. p. 310 B. 'H fnqrqq ydq rdv 2afiovfjX fifj t/x-
rovaa did ^ovXyv Qeov riro'/s, '/at fj yvvy roO dyiov narqtaqyov
'A^qadfi, '/at 'EXiad^er fj rdv (Sannarfjv 'iwdvvqv rexovaa. (Luke
i. 7, 57.)
Bial. c. 88. p. 315 C. Kat ydq yevvydetg [6 'iZjOovg] SvvafCiv
rqv avrov says' xat av^dvcov '/ard rd 'xotvdv rdv aXXwv dndv-
Twv dvdqdnwv , yqdfisvog rolg dqfic'iCovatv, s'/dary ai^-fjaei rd
ol'/elov dniveifie, rqecpdjievog rdg ndaag rqocpdg (Luke ii. 40)
'/at rqid'/ovra Ittj y nXsiova y xat iXdaaova fisivag, fiixqig ov
nqosXfjXvdsv 'icodvvrjg '/yqv§ airov '/.r.X.
Bial. c. 96. p. 324 A. Omog ydq idida^sv fjfidg '/at vniq
rcov iydqcov s'vxsadai, s'uidv livsads xqi^iO'roi '/at ol'/riq-
fiovsg, wg xat b 7caryq 'vfiiov b ovqdvtog. (Luke vi. 36.)
Bial. c. 100. p. 327 C. Hiariv 8i '/at xctqdv Xaiovaa Maqia
fj naqdivog svayysXiCofiivov avrfj la^qiyX dyyiXov on nvsvfia
Kvqiov in airyv snsXsvasrat xai Svvafiig vxpiarov inta'/idasL
avrfjv, 8id xai to ysvvcofisvov e§ avrfjg dyidv iart vldg Qsov,
dnsxqivaro' Fivotrd fiot xaTa to qfjfid aov. (See also Apol.
I. c. 33. p. 75 A quoted abov6.)
Bial. c. 103. p. 331 A. 'Hqwdov de Toi? 'AqxiXaov 8ta8e^a-
fiivov . . . ip '/at HiXdrog xaqiCdfievog dsSsfiivov rdv 'lyaovv s'nsfi-
ips. (Luke xxiii. 7.)
Bial. c. 103. p. 331 B. See before, p. 64. (Luke xxii. 42.)
6. Letter of the GnaiSTUNs op Vienne and Lyons.*
Eus. H. E. V. 1. Merinsira 8s sni rdv yysfiova dvaydiv-
= Justin here follows Luke, whose word iadyyiXoi and the closing clause xol
ulo( eZoiv ©sou Tiij; dvaCTTdaEu; ulol ovte;, are not in Mat. xxii. 30, or Mark
xii, 25. » The long letter of the Churches of Gaul on the banks of the Rhone to

letter op christians OF VIENNE AND LYONS. IRENAEUS. 159
TWV avrcov, '/a'/sivov nday rfj 7cqdg fjfidg dfinrTjTi XQ>](!ciftirnv,
OvsTTiog Endyadog, eig ex twv ddeXcpdv, 7cX-fjqcofia dydnrjg T>}g
TT^og TOV Qsdv '/at 7Tqdg rdv nXyaiov -/S'ycoqyxcog , {ov '/at snt
Toaovrov y/qificoro y noXtrsia, ds '/ainsq 'dvza viov aws^iaov-
adai rfj rov nqsa^vriqov Zayaqiov fiaqrvqicf nsndqsvro yovv
iv ndaaig ralg ivroXalg '/at 8i'/aic6fiaai rov Kvqiov dfisfinrog
'/at nday rfj 7rqdg rdv 7cXrjaiov Xstrovqyicje do'/vng, CfjXov Qeofj
noXvv sycov, '/at Cicov np 7i:vevfiari) . . . dveXfjCpdrj '/at airdg elg
TOV '/Xrjqov rcov fiaqriqwv, naqd'/Xyrog Xqianavwv yqyfiariaag,
sycov de tov naqd'/Xyrov iv savnp, rd Hvsvfta nXslov rov Zaxaqiov.
(Luke i. 6, 67.) 7. Irenaeus.
B. III. 1. Aovxdg 8s 6 axo^oi;^og HavXov, rd vn' i'/si
vov xyqvaadfisvov siayyiXiov ev ^i^Xiiij '/aridsro.^ (See before,
page 67.)
those in Asia and Phrygia is preserved by Eusebius, It contains a touching pic
ture of sufferings which it says the writers are unable to tell or write. Although
it does not name the books of the N, T,, it has many expressions frora the Gos
pels of Luke and John and from most of the Epistles of Paul inwoven with its
simple story. It is the testimony of the church of Irenaeus, and he was the
bearer of it (Eus. H, E, V. 4,). Pothinus, who courted martyrdom in the .per
secution, was more than 90 years old, and was a link between Irenaeus and the
Apostolic age. The chief importance of the letter lies in its being the letter of
one church to another; for we thus learn how strong was the bond of common
knowledge and common hope which bound together the scattered churches of
Christendom, •- These expressions of Irenaeus are in keeping with the longer passage
(HI, 14, § 1, 2, 3), with Origen's view (Eus, H. E. VI. 25), with Tertullian's
repeated statements (Adv, Marc. IV, 2, 5), aud with those of Jerome (De vir, ill,
c, 7), all of which are given in the text, Eusebius H. E, III. 4, (see below)
does not speak so assuredly, but his only doubt seeras to be (qjaol Se') whether
it was Luke's Gospel that Paul referred to when he said " according to my
Gospel," He implies in the previous sentences his* belief that while Luke w,as
indebted to all the Apostles he was specially indebted to Paul for the materials
of his Gospel. The tradition of the Pauline origin of Luke's Gospel may there
fore be regarded as early and wide-spread. There are also internal evidences of
the Pauline origin of this Gospel, Take for example the account of the institution
of the supper, which corresponds with that iu 1 Cor. xi.; or the correspondence
in expression between Luke i, ii. and Romans ix, x, xi. Compare further Luke
X, 8 with 1 Cor. x, 27 ; Luke xx, 38 with Rom. xiv. 8. There are also many cases
in which the Evangelist and thc Apostle use words in the sarae peculiar sense.
See Davidson, Introd, to N. T, II, 12, The pu*-pose and the doctrine of the Gospel
are in close affinity with the truth as taught by Paul. See Hilg., Die Evange
lien, p. 220, &c., and Baur, Evangelien, p. 480-484. On the whole relation of
Paul and Luke, in so far as diction goes, see Holtzmann, Die synopt. Evang.,
§ 19, 10. p. 318, &c. Compare p. 154 note 1, of this book.

160 GOSPEL OP LUKE.
B. III. 14. § 1. Quoniam autem is Lucas inseparabihs fuit
a Paulo, et cooperarius ejus in evangelio, ipse facit manifestum,
non glorians, sed ab ipsa productus veritate.^ § 2. Sic apostoli
simpliciter et neraini invidentes, quae didicerant ipsi a Domino,
haec omnibus tradebant. Sic igitur et Lucas neraini invidens,
ea quae ab eis didicerat, tradidit nobis, sicut ipse testificatur,
dicens: Quemadmodum tradiderunt nobis qui ab initio contem-
platores et ministri fuerunt verhi. (Luke i. 2.) § 3. Si autem
quis refutet''' Lucam, quasi non cognoverit veritatem, manifestus
erit projiciens Evangeliura, cujus dignatur esse discipulus.* Plu
rima enim et raagis necessaria Evangelii per hunc cognoviraus,
sicut Joannis generationem, et de Zacharia historiam, et adven
tura angeli ad Mariara, et exclamationeni Elizabeth, et angelo-
rum ad pastores descensum, et ea quae ab illis dicta sunt, et
Annae et Simeonis de Christo testimonium, et quod duodecim
annorum in Hierusalem relictus sit, et baptismum Joannis, et
quot annorum Dominus baptizatus sit, et quia in quintodecimo
anno Tiberii Caesaris (Luke i. ii. iii). Et in magisterio illud
quod ad divites dictum est: "Vae vobis di-vites, quoniam perci-
pitis consolationem vestram:" Et, "vae vobis qui satiati estis,
quoniam esurietis: et qui ridetis nunc, quia plordbitis:" Et,
"vae vobis cum henedixerint vos homines omnes. Secundum haec
enim faciebant et pseudo-prophetis patres vestri:" (Luke vi. 24
&c.) Et omnia hujusmodi per solum Lucara cognoviraus, (et plu
rimos actus Doraini per hunc didicimus, quibus et omnes utun
tur^): ut multitudinem piscium, quam concluserunt hi qui cum
Petro erant, jubente Domino ut mitterent retia (v. 6): et ilia
quae per octodecim annos passa, curata fuerat mulier die sab-
batorum (xiii. 11): et de hydropico, quem curavit Dominus die
sabbatorum, et quemadmodum disputavit quod curavit in hac die
(xiv. 2): et quemadraodura docuit discipulos primos discubitus
non appetere (xiv. 7): et quoniara pauperes et debiles vocare
' For the whole passage see below under "Acts of the Apostles,"
' Befutarc is used by Irenaeus in the sense of reject.
* Tlie heretics of whora he here speaks were probably the Marcionites. In
the close of the extract he contrasts their rejection of the Gospel with the Va
lentinian explanation of it,
^ Both heretics and ordinary Christians were indebted to Luke for special
incidents only found in his Gospel and admitted by them all.

IRENAEUS. 161
oportet, qui non habent retribuere (xiv. 12) : et qui pulsavit nocte
suraere panes, et propter instantiara importunitatis sumit (xi. 8):
et quoniam apud Pharisaeum recurabente eo, peccatrix mulier
osculabatur pedes ejus et unguento ungebat, et quaecumque pro
pter eam dixit ad Simonem Dominus de duobus debitoribus (vii.
37): et de parabola divitis illius qui reclusit quae ei nata fue
rant cui et dictura est: "In hac nocte expostulabunt animam
tuam a te: quae autem praeparasti, cujus erunt?" (xii. 20). Si
militer autem et divitis qui vestiebatur purpura, et jocundaba-
tur® nitide: et egenura Lazarum (xvi. 20): et eam quam ad dis-
centes suos dixit responsionera, quando dixerunt ei: "Adjice no
bis fidera" (xvii. 5): et eam quae ad Zacchaeura publicanum facta
est confabulationem (xix. 2): et de Pharisaeo et de publicano,
qui siraul adorabant in teraplo (xviii. 10): et de decera leprosis,
quos siraul emundavit in via (xvii. 12): et quoniam de vicis et
plateis claudos et luscos' jussit coUigi ad nuptias (xiv. 21); et
parabolara judicis qui Deura non timebat, quem instantia viduae
fecit ut vindicaret eam (xviii. 2): et de arbore fici quae erat in
vinea, quae non faciebat fructum (xiii. 6). Et alia multa sunt,
quae inveniri possunt a solo Luca dicta esse, quibus et Marcion
et Valentinus utuntur. Et" super haec omnia, post resurrectio
nem, in via ad discipulos suos quae loquutus est, et quemadmo
dum cognoverunt eum in fractionc panis. § 4. Necesse est igitur
et reliqua quae ab eo dicta sunt, recipere eos, aut et his renun-
tiare. Non enim conceditur eis ab his qui sensum habent, quae
dam quidem recipere ex his quae a Luca dicta sunt, quasi sint
veritatis; quaedara vero refutare,* quasi non cognovisset verita
tera. Et si quidera refutaverint hi qui a Marcione sunt, non ha
bebunt Evangelium : (hoc enim quod est secundura Lucam, quem
adraodura praediximus, dccurtantes, gloriantur se habere Evan
geliura) hi vero qui a Valentino sunt cessabunt a plurirao va-
niloquio suo: (ex hoc enira raultas occasiones subtililoquii sui
acceperunt, interpretari audentes male, quae ab hoc bene sunt
dicta) si autem et reliqua suscipere cogentur, intendentes 'per-
" Al. vestitur purpuram et jocundabatur.
' Al, caecos,
8 See note 3, 11

162 GOSPEL OP LUKE.
fecto Evangelio,^ et apostolorum doctrinae, oportet eos pceniten
tiam agere, ut salvari a periculo possint.
B. III. 10. § 1. Lucas autem sectator et discipulus aposto
lorura, de Zacharia et Elizabeth, ex quibus secundura reprorais-
sionem Dei Joannes natus est, referens ait: "Erant autem justi
ambo ante Deum, etc." (Luke i. 6.)
8. Tatian.
Eus. H. E. IV. 49. (See before, page 72.)
Orat. c. Grace, (p. 32). FsXars 8i vfislg, c'og '/at '/Xaiaovrsg.
(Luke vi. 25.)
9. Athenagoras.
Legatio, c. 33. "Og ydq dv dnoXvay, cpTjOi, rfjv yvval'/a a'v-
rov '/at yafiyay dXXqv, fioiydvai. (Lukexvi. 18; compare Mat.
V. 32; xix. 9.) ' 10. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. II. (p. 92). Td ydq naqd dvdqw7coig d8vvara,
8vvaTd ian 7raqd Qscp. (Luke xviii. 27; compare Mat. xix. 26;
Mark x. 27.) 11. Clement of Alexandria.
Eus. H. E. VL 14. (See before, page 75.)
Strom. III. (See before, page 75.)
12. Tertullian.
Adv. Marc. IV. 2. (See before, page 76.) There Tertullian
calls Luke "apostolicus, apostoli sectator, Pauli sine dubio;" and
adds: "Igitur si ipse illuminator Lucae auctoritatem antecesso
rum et fidei et praedicationi suae optavit, quanto raagis eara
> 9 Viilentine accepted the text in full, but "made it of none effect" by his
explanations, (So Tertullian says, Valentinus integro Insitincmento uti videtur. — De
Praescript, Haeret, c. 38) Marcion, on the other hand, mutilated the Gospel Text,

JULIUS AFRICANUS. ORIGEN. CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 163
evangelio Lucae expostulem, quae evangelio magistri ejus fuit
necessaria." Ibid. IV. 5. (See before, page 80.) Nara et Lucae Digestum
Paulo adscribere solent &c.
13. Julius Africanus.
Eus. H. E. I. 7. (Soe before, page 137.)
14. Origen.
Eus. H. E. VL 25. Kat rqirov rd '/ard Aov/dv rd 'vnd
IlavXov inaivnvfisvov siayyiXiov. (See above, page 8.)
Horn, in Gen. XIII. (above, page 52).
Hom. in Jos., VIL (above, page 52).
Comment, in Joann. (above, page 83, &c.).
In epist. ad Rom. c. xvi. 21. (Migne, vol. IV. p. 1288.) Seil
et Luciura quidam ipsum perhibent esse Lucam, qui Evangelium
scripsit, pro eo quod soleant nomina interdum secundum patriam
declinationem, interdum etiam secundum Graecam Roraaiiamque
prof err i.l
Bial. de recta in Beum fide. (Migne, vol. I. p. 1721.) Mdq
'/og '/at Aov/dg, ex TtSv o/?' ovTeg, HavXij) rip dnnardXcjr svrjy-
yeXiaavro.
15. Clementine Homilies.
See Introduction for discussion. For passages in full, see next part of this work.
The following references may meanwhile be compared : —
Hom. III. 15 (Luke xix. 43, 44; Mat. xxiv. 2, 34; Mark xiii. 2).
Hom. III. 63 (Luke xix. 5). Hom. IIL 71 (Luke x. 7).
Hom. VIIL 7 (Luke vi. 46; Mat. vii. 21). Horn. LX. 22

' Origen does not commit himself to the identification of Lucius (Rom, xvi.
21) with the Evangelist Luke. Whether this Lucius was the same as he of Cy-
rene (Acts xiii. 1) is uncertain (see Meyer in loc.). But that Lucius of Cyrene
is not the same as the Evangelist is clear, because the historian in the Acts does
not use the first person (Acts xiii, 3) when speaking of actions in which Lucius
took part, Lucas is more probably a contraction for Lucanus, and suggests that
it was given to a native ofLucania, or southern Italy, (See after, note 1, under
Eusebius,) 11*

164 GOSPEL OP LUKE.
(Luke X. 20). Hom. XL 20 (Luke xxiii. 34). Horn. XVIL 5
(Luke xii. 4, 5 and xviii. 6-8; Mat. x. 28). Hom. XIX. 2
(Luke X. 18). 16. Eusebius.
H. E. IIL 25 (before, page 10).
Ibid. IIL 24 (before, page 87).
H. E. ILL. 4. ^Aov'/t.dg 8i rd fiiv yivog tov rdv d7c' 'Avzio-
"ysiag, ti)v iniar'fjfirjv de larqdg, rd nXslara avyysynvwg np HavXio,
'/at rolg Xoinolg de oi naqiqycog riov dnoardXcov wfuXy/cog, ^g
dnd TOVTWV nqoae'/ryaaro ipvycHv d-eqanevrt'/yg iv dvatv fjfilv
¦'vnofivyfiara deo7CvevaToig xaziXins (iijSXoig, np rs EvayysXtij), o
'/at yaqd^at fiaqrvqslrat '/add naqi8oaav avrcp ol anaqyfjg av-
Tonrai '/at vnyqirat yevdftsvot rov Xoyov, oig '/ai cpyatv inavw-
dsv d7caai naqrj/oXovdrj/ivai, xat ralg rdv 'AnoardXwv Hqa^s-
fftv, ag off/in 8t d'/oyg, dcpdcxXfiolg de naqaXaJidv awsrd^aro.
(Daat de dg dqa roll '/ar' airdv EiayysXiov fivijfiovsvstv 6 Ilav
Xog s'icodsv, bnyvL'/a tig 7csqt Idiov nvdg siayysXiov yqdcpwv s'Xsys
"'/ard rd siayyiXiov fiov."
• The name Luke is probably, as we have seen, a, contraction for Lucanus,
or native of Lucania. It is quite possible, nevertheless, that the father of the
Evangelist was a Lucanian, while he was himself frora Antioch. That he was a
physician makes it not improbable that he was a freedman or the son of a freed
man, as those born in that position almost filled the medical ranks at the begin
ning of the Christian era. It is not impossible that he was educated in the
Medical School at Tarsus, and, if so, his intimacy with St Paul is easily accounted
for. But his intimate acquaintance with Antioch is seen in his giving so fully
the names and details in connection with the church there. (Acts vi, 5 ; xi. 1 9 ;
XX, 28 ; xiii, 1 ; xv, 1-3, 22-25,) He raust have raet there many who were scattered
after the first persecution (Acts xi, 19), He went with Paul to Philippi, and it
was his labours in that place which especially won for him Paul's panegyric in
2 Cor. viii, 18, 19, He seems at least to have remained in Philippi when Paul
left, as the narrative changes from the first person (Acts xvi, 10) to the third
(Acts xvii. 1). The second Ep. to the Corinthians is said to have been " written
from Philippi by Titus and Lucas;" and although the report, which Eusebius
preserves in the close of- the extract, that Paul referred to the Gospel of Luke in
2 Tim. ii. 8, is not likely to be historical, the zeal of Luke in respect of his
preaching of the Gospel, and the position which his character and culture had
gained for him in many parts of Europe and Asia, marked him out as the Apostle's
best colleague in the management of the collection for the poor saints. The con
stant references to Luke as a physician make it clear that he did not forget the
exercise of his professional skill when he was a Christian Teacher. He ministered
to Paul in his illnesses, and was with him to the last; — see Col, iv, 14; Philem.
24; 2 Tim, iv, 11. (See Plnmptre's interesting and ingenious sketch in Introd,
to St Luke in Commentary for English Readers.)

epiphanius. JEROME. 165

1 7. Epiphanius.

Haeres. tom. I. p. 941 (before, page 21).
Ibid. Haeres. 51 (before, page 95 &c.).'
18. Jerome.
E2yisi. II ad Paulinum (before, page 21).
Be vir. III. c. 7. Lucas raedicus Antiochensis, ut ejus scri
pta indicant, Graeci sermonis non ignarus fuit, sectator apo
stoli Pauli, et omnis peregrinationis ejus coraes. Scripsit Evan
gelium, de quo idem Paulus: "Missimus," inquit, "cum illo fra-
trem, cujus laus est in Evangelio per omnes ecclesias." (2 Cor.
viii.) Et ad Colossenses: "Salutat vos Lucas medicus carissi-
raus." Et ad Timotheum : "Lucas est mecura solus." Ahud quo
que edidit volumen egregium, quod titulo Apostolicarum nqa^icov
praenotatur, cujus historia usque ad biennium Romae comrao-
rantis Pauli pervenit, id est, usque ad quartura Neronis annura.
Ex quo intelhgimus, in eadem urbe librum esse compositum. . . .
Quidam suspicantur, quotiescunque in epistolis suis Paulus dicit:
"juxta Evangeliura raeum," de Lucae significare volumine: et
Lucara non solura ab apostolo Paulo didicisse Evangeliura, qui
cura Doraino in carne non fuerat, sed et a caeteris apostolis.
Quod ipse quoque in principio sui volurainis declarat, dicens:
"Sicut tradiderunt nobis, qui a principio ipsi viderunt, et ministri
fuerunt sermonis." Igitur Evangehura sicut audierat, scripsit.
Acta vero Apostolorura sicut viderat, coraposuit. Sepultus est
Constantinopoli, ad quara urbera vicesirao Constantii anno, ossa
ejus cura reliquiis Andreae apostoli translata sunt.
Comment, in Isai. III. 6. Evangelistara Lucara tradunt ve
teres Ecclesiae Tractatores medicinae artis fuisse scientissiraum,
et raagis Graecas literas scisse quara Hebraeas. Unde et sermo
¦ Epiphanius, Haer. 51. 11, says Luke preached the Gospel in Dalmatia,
Gallia, Italy, Macedonia, but first in Gallia; and founds upon the reading Gallia
(for Galatia) in 2 Tim. iv. lOi whioh is also supported by !* and C. If he ac
companied Paul on his last journey into Spain, the tradition of his connection
with Gaul may be so far well-founded. "Lucanus" the poet was a native of
Spain. But all that regards Luke after Paul's death is uncertain; the conjectures
of recent writers being too obviously baseless.

166 GOSPEL OF LUKE.
ejus tara in Evangelio, quam in Actibus Apostolorum, id est, in
utroque volumine comptior est, et saecularem redolet eloquen-
tiam, magisque testimoniis Graecis utitur quara Hebraeis.
Epist. Bamaso 145. Lucas igitur, qui inter oranes cvange-
listas Graeci serraonis eruditissiraus fuit, quippe et raedicus, et
qui Evangeliura Graecis scripserit, quia se vidit proprietateni
sermonis. Catal. script, eccl. c. 7. Lucas medicus, natione Syrus An
tiochensis, cujus laus in Evangelio, qui et ipse discipulus Pauli
Apostoli, in Achaiae Boeotiae partibus volumen condidit.^
' Luke is much more likely to have written his Gospel in Cesarea during
Paul's imprisonment there. The narrative of the Acts ends with the Roman im
prisonment, i.e., about AD, 63 ; and the Gospel is spoken of as an earlier
treatise — apparently a considerable time earlier. The tirae A, D, 58-60 while Paul
was in Cesarea is therefore probable. Luke's own diligent inquiries would be
facilitated hy his residing in Cesarea, His information regarding the Herodian
family would be easily gained there. Compare Luke iii. 1; xiii. 32; xxiii. 5-12;
Acts xii, 1-25; xxv, 13; xxvi, 32. Plumptre (see before, on Euseb, note 1) sug
gests that he owed it to Manaen (Acts xiii. 1) ; but this idea, while possible, seeras
unnecessary.

167IX.
GOSPEL OF JO H N.
1. Papias.
Eus. H. E. III. 39. ^ Kiyqqrai 8' b avrdg fiaqrvqiaig dnd
T^g Icodvvov nqoriqag i.7iiarnXfjg, '/at dnd T^g Hirqov bfioicog.
Exridsirai di '/at dXXqv laroqiav^ nsqt yvvar/dg, int nnXXalg
dfiaqriaig dia^Xydsiaqg i7ct rov Kvqiov. "ffv to '/ad' 'Ejiqaiovg
svayyiXiov nsqis'ysi.^
Irenaeus V. 36. 2. ^Kcd did rovro s'lqrj/ivai tov Kvqinv 'Ev
rolg roi nazqng finv finvdg sivat 7ioXXdg (see above, page 72).
Anastasius Sinaita. (See before, page 59.)
(Rout A's Re/iyin'ae Sacrae, I. 16, J
Maria mater Domini, Maria Cleophae, sive Alphei, uxor, quae
fuit mater Jacobi episcopi et apostoli, et Symonis, et Thadei, et
cujusdam Joseph; Maria Salome, uxor Zebedei, mater Joannis
evangelistae, et Jacobi (compare Mat. xxvii. 5, 6; Mark xv. 40 and
xvi. 1); Maria Magdalena. Istae quatuor in evangelio reperiun-
tur. . . . Maria Jacobi' minoris, et Joseph, mater, uxor Alphei,
soror fuit Mariae matris Domini, quam Cleophae Joannes nominat
(John xix. 25) vel a patre, vel a gentihtatis familia, vel alia causa.
[Note. This is taken from » MS of the fourteenth century, and is not by
the Apostolic Papias, but by a Latin lexicographer of the same name in the
eleventh century,]
• The first sentence distinctly says that Papias quoted from the first epistle
of John, which is admitted to be by the same author as the Gospel, The col
location of 1 Peter with it may perhaps indicate that Papias was grouping Mark's
Gospel and Peter's Epistle, on the one hand, with John's Gospel and Epistle, on
the other. Something like this may have also suggested the Muratorian testimony
that John was an eye-witness, while the statement of the last sentences upon Mark's
Gospel in that fragment may have been that Mark was not an eye-witness, but
only the amanuensis of Peter,
* The second sentence is supposed to refer to the pericope adulterae (John vii,
53 — viii. 11), which is not an original part of John's Gospel.
s Papias's words, aunq ij aXvjSEia, see p. 54, are like John if they are a de
signation of Christ, but that is doubtful. The use of ^vtoXtJ to describe Christ's
doctrine is also like John. See page 54,
* The whole passage may be a quotation from Papias. See Routh, Rei. Sac.
pp. 11, 19; and Davidson, Int, N, T. II, 372.

168 GOSPEL OF JOHN.
f^ul. Alex. No. 14. Note prefixed to JohiCs Gospel.
Evangelium johannis manifestatum et datura est ecclesiis ab
johanne adhuc in corpore constitute, sicut papias nomine hiera
politanus discipulus johannis carus in exotericis [exegeticis], id
est in extremis, quinque libris retulit. Disscripsit vero evange
lium dictante johanne recte; verum Martion haereticus cura ab
eo fuisset improbatus eo quod contraria sentiebat, abjectus est
a johanne. Is vero scripta vel epistolas ad eum pertulerat a
fratribus qui in Ponto fuerunt.
[Note. — The MS is ascribed to the ninth century, but the prefatory note
is old, older than Jerome, in Tischendorfs opinion. The passage seems to
be made up of detached notices. The account of Marcion is an anachronism.
Disscripsit vero evangeliu-m is supposed to have been a translation of o iai-
fpixdfm ano TOU OTCfiaTo; auTou , aTtEypaipov being third person plural, but
mistaken by some later writer for the first person singular, so as to make
Papias himself the amanuensis. (See Lightfoot, Contemp. Review, October
1875, p, 854.)]
2. Barnabas.
C. 2. 6. '0 xat vog vdfiog znv Kvqinv fjficov Iqanv Xqiazov.
(Compare John xiii. 34, fj '/aivfj ivroX-rj.)
C. b. 1. Elg rovro ydq vnijisivsv b Kvqiog naqadovvai rfjv
adq'/a sig xaracpd^oqdv, 'iva ry acpiasi twv dfiaqridv dyvt-
adcTjfisv, o ianv iv np a'ifiart rov qavriajiarog airov. (John
xi. 55.) C. 5. 7. "Iva xal zolg narqdat ryv inayyeX'iav dno8cp '/at ai
rdg sa-mcp rdv Xadv rdv '/aivdv sroifid^wv inidsi^y int rfjg yfjg
wv, on rfjv dvdaraaiv airdg notyaag xqivsl. (John v. 21, &c.)
C. 5. 9.^ 'Ecpaviqwasv savrdv sivai vldv Qsov. El ydq fifj
rjXdsv iv aaq'/t, oid' dv nwg ol dvdqwnot iaddyaav §Xinov-
rsg avrdv.
C. 5. 13. ^!Bdei ydq 'iva int ^vXov nddrj, Xiyst ydq 6 nqo-
cpqrsvcov in ainp' (Dslaai fiov T^g ipvyfjg and qoficpaiag.^ (See
John xix. 34.)
1 See first part of passage, before, page 102, For tjXSev h tjapxt see also
Barn. c. 5, 11,
^ This is quoted because it is said that, had the author known what John
says of the Romau soldier's , spear, he could not have written it. But that by no
means foUows,

BARNABAS. 169
C. 6. 6. Ti ovv Xiyst ndXiv 6 nqncpfjrqg; Hsqtia'/sv fis
avvaycoyfj novqqsvn fiivwv, ixv'/Xcoadv fis coast fiiXta-
aat '/qqiov '/ai' 'Ent rdv Ifiaria fidv fiov EJiaXov '/Xq-
qov. (Compare John xix. 24. See also Justin, Apol. I. c. 38.
P.77D.) C.6. 7. 'Ev aaqxt ovv avrov fiiXXovrog cpaveqovadat
'/at ndayeiv, nqoecpavsqddq rd 7tddog. Aiyst ydq n nqncprjrqg
int rdv 'laqafjX' '/.r.X. (John i. 31; 1 John i. 2; 1 John iii. 5-8;
also 1 Tira. iii. 16.)
C. 6. 9. Ti di Xiyst fj yvdatg ; Mddsrs ¦ EXniaars , cpyatv,
i7tt rdv iv aaq'/t fiiXXovr-a cpavsqo vadat vfilv 'irjaovv. (See
also C. 5, 6; 6, 14; 12, 10.)
C. 7. 2. El ovv 6 L'tog rov Qsov, cov Kvqiog, '/at fiiXXcov
'/qivsiv tiovrag '/at vs'/qovg, snadsv 'ivafj nXrjyfj airov
tcoonoiyay rfidg, niarevacofiev 'on b vldg tov Qeov ov/ fjdvvaro
nadelv sl fifj 8l' fjfidg.^ (John v. 21 ; xii. 5.)
C. 7. 9. 'Ensi8fj oxpovrat airdv rdre rfj yfisqijc rdv nodyqq
E'yovra rdv '/d'/'/ivov nsqt rfjv adq'/a, '/at iqovatv ' Oiy ovrdg ianv
bv nors fjfislg iaravqwaafisv i^ovdsvqaavrsg x.at '/ara'/svrij-
aavreg '/at ifinrvaavreg; 'AXydcog obrog yv 6 TOTe ^e'ywv sav
rdv vldv rov Qsov slvai. (Corapare John xix. 37 and Mat.
xxvii. 28, 30.)
C. 8. 5. "On de to s'qiov int rd ^vXov on y (iaaiXsia 'lyaov
int ^vXov, xat ort ol iX7ii'QovTEg en' airdv 'Q-rjaovrat elg rdv
aldva. (See also c. 6. 3; 11. 10 below; 11. 11. Compare John
vi. 51, 58; and Ezek. xlvii. 1-12.)
C. 9. 7. Mddere ovv, ri'/va dydnyg, 7ceqt ndvnov nXovaicog,
ort 'A§qadfi nqcorng neqtrofifjv doig iv nvevfian nqoflXixpag
elg rdv 'lyaovv nsqiirsfisv, Xa§wv rqidv yqafifidrwv ddyfiara.*
(John viii. 56.)
C. 11. 10. °0g dv cpdyy e^ airdv t'Tjasrat sig rdv aliova.
(See also 11. 11; John iv. 14; vi. 51.)
C. 12. 5. HdXiv Mcovafjg noisl rwrov rov 'Iqaov, 'on det av-

3 See also Barn, c. 6, 17, ^uoTCOtoutJievot ^TidopiEV,
* Here follows a dissertation on the three letters SIH (318), of which, accord
ing to "Barnabas," the first indicates the cross (oTaupo;) and the other two are
the first letters of the name 'Iif)C3ou;!

170 GOSPEL OP JOHN.
rdv nadslv '/at airdg Cioonorqasi '/.r.X. (See long passage, treat
ing of the serpent as a type of Christ; corapare John iii. 14.)
C. 16. 8. Aafidvrsg rfjv dcpeaiv rdv dfiaqridv '/at iXniaavreg
snt rd 'dvofia iysvdfisd-a xaivot, ndXtv i^ aqyyg xTi-
Kdfisvot' did iv rip '/aror/yryqiqi fjficov dXyddg o Qsdg '/aroi-
xet ev Tjfilv. (John iii. 3; compare Eph. iii. 17.)
- C. 19. 1. 'H ovv bddg rov ipwrdg ianv a'vry idv Tig di-
Xcov bddv bdsvsiv int rdv coqtafiivov rdnov, ansvay rolg sqyoig
airov. (Compare John iii. 20; xiv. 6.)
C 19. 12. Oi nqoafj^stg inl nqoasvyfjv iv awsidyast novyqd.
(Compare John ix. 31.)
C. 21. 2. 'Eqcorw rovg vnsqiyovzag, s'i zivd finv yvcofiyg aya-
difg Xafi^dvszs avfi^ovXiav sysrs fied' savrcov sig ovg iq-
y day ads' rd '/a Xdv fifj iy/araXslnqTS. (Corapare John xii. 8.)
C 21. 6. riveads 8i dso8l8a'/Tnt, s'/Lqrnvvzsg ri trjzsl
Kvqiog dcp' vfiiov, '/at nnislrs iva svqsdfjzE iv fjfiiqcc '/qiascog.
(Compare John vi. 45.)
[Note. Besides the passages quoted above, Keim (Jesus of Nazara, vol. i.
p. 193, note) enumerates the following resemblances: iKolrjCE^ l-tToK'tfi, c. 6;
UK^HEivE TcapaSouvai tt^v aapxa, c. 6; auTo; ¦ij3AY)a£v outo) KaSsiv, u. 5; iizi-
3up.ia aapxoc, c, 10; Spirit, cc. 1, 5, 16; Gnosis, cc. I, 10; new birth, c, 16;
taught of God, c, 21; temple of God, vao; dy. t^Xeio;, xaTotxif)TiQptov, 6£o;
xaTOtxwv £i, cc. 4, 6; xaivo; vofjio;, c. 2; ^vtoXti, Ttaaa iixoX-f^, cc. 9, 19, 21;
love of the brethren, cc. 1, 4; joy, cc, 7, 21,]
3. Clement of Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 31. 2. Tivog ydqtv yiXoyrjdy b narfjq fjfiwv 'A^qadfi ; oi'yt
8i'/aLoavvrjv xai dXrjdsiav 8id niarscog n niyaag; (John iii. 21;
compare 1 John i. 6.)
C. 43. 6. Ti 8o'/elre dyanrjroi; ni nqny8eL Mcovafjg rniro
fiiXXeiv 'sasadai; jidXiara ydsi, aXX 'iva fiq d'/araaraaia yivyrai
iv Tip 'laqafjX, ovnog snoiyasv sig rn Sn^aadqvai zd 'dvofia rnv
1 The passages which follow may be regarded as suggesting John's Gospel,
if not actually quoting it ; they are echoes if not citations. There may be added
to them as fainter echoes c, 31, 2, comp, John iii. 21 ; c. 42, 1, comp. John
xvii, 3 , and xx, 21 ; t. 47, 4, comp, John xix, 11 ; c. 48. 4, comp. John x. 7. 9 ;
c. 49. 6, comp. John xv. 12.

clement op ROME. IGNATIUS. 171
dXrjdivnv '/at fidvov Kvqiov^ [©eot)]' ip 'q dd^a eig rovg alco-
vag rcov aldvcov. 'Afifjv. (John xvii. 3; 1 John v. 20.)
C. 49. 1. 0 sycov aydnyv iv Xqianp nniyadno rd rnv Xqi-
arnfj naqayyiXfiara. (John xiv. 15, 23; compare 1 John v. 1-3.)
C. 49. 6. Td aifia airov sdco'/sv vniq yfidv 'lyaovg Xqiazdg
b Kvqiog ijfidv iv dsXfjfian Qsov, '/at rfjv adq'/a vniq T^g aaq
'/dg fjficov '/at T?;v ipvyfjv vniq nov xpvxdrv fjfiiov, (John vi. 5-1 ;
XV. 13.) Second Epistle.
(7. 3. 1. "Eyvcofisv 8t' aizov rdv ndrsqa rfjg dXydsiag. (John
i. 18; xiv. 9.)
C. 6. 9. Ttg fjfidv naqd'/Xyrog sarat idv ftfj svqsdiofisv
s'qya s'yovrsg 'data '/at di'/aia; (John xv. 26.)
C. 9. 5. El Xqiardg b Kvqiog b adaag fjfidg, wv fiiv rd nqco-
rov nvsvfia, iyivsro adq§ '/at o'vrcog fjfidg i'/dXsasv. (John i. 14.)
Hieron. in Jes. 53. 13. ^ Clemens, vir apostohcus, qui post
Petrura Roraanara rexit ecclesiara, scribit ad Corinthios: "Scep-
trum Dei, Dorainus noster Jesus Christus, non venit in jactan-
tia superbiae, quura possit orania, sed in hurailitate, in tantura
ut verberatus a rainistro sacerdotis responderit: Si raale locutus
sum, argue de peccato, sin autem bene, quid me caedis?" (John
xviii. 22, 23.) 4. Ignatius. ^
Eph. c. 17. Aid rovro fivqov sXa^ev snt T^g '/sipaXyg airov
6 Kiqiog, iva nviy rfj i'/'/Xyaicx dcpdaqaiav. Mfj aXsicpsads 8va-
* The Syriac translates as though jao'vou aXif)3ivou 6eou. The MS of Bryennios
reads Euptcu.
s The passage in Clement to which Jerome refers is in C. 16 of his (first)
Epistle : To axfJTCTpov ty); (jiEYaXuouvt); tou ©sou , o" Kupto; TjfjLuv XptoTo; 'It)-
oou;, oux tiXSev h xo'.utiu a'XaJovEia; ou'Se un£p-r)tpav[a; , xaircEp SuvaV^w?) a^^a
TaTiEtvotppovtdv, xaiJu; to TtvEU|J,a to Sytov TCsp'i auTou ^XaXijaEv : tprjolv f^p' x,t.X.
Then follows a quotation of Isaiah liii. 1-12, In these words Jerome seems to
quote Clement from memory, and then to run into another quotation of his own
from the Gospel,
' In addition to the following passages, which may be regarded as quotations,
there maybe taken as Echoes: Eph, 7, 2, and 11. 1, comp. John xvii. 3; Magnes.
7. 1, comp. John V. 19; Magnes. 7. 2, comp. John xvi, 28; Smyrn, 4 1, comp,
John xvii. 3 ; TraU. 9, 2, comp. Johu xvii, 3.

172 GOSPEL OP JOHN.
io8iav zfjg 8i8aaxaXiag rov dqxovrog rov aldvog rnvrov, fifj aly-
fiaXcorlay vfidg ex rov nqo'/eifiivov t,yv. Aid ri 8i ov navreg
cpqdvifioi yivdfieda, Xafidvzeg Qsov yvwaiv, o ianv Irjaovg Xqi
ardg; Ti ficoqcHg dnnXXvfisda, dyvoovvrsg rd XdqiOfia, o ninofi-
cpev dXyddg b Kvqiog; (John xii. 3, 4.)
Eph. c. 18. 2. '0 ydq Qsdg fjfiwv 'lyaovg 6 Xqiardg ixvocpo-
qrjdy vnd Maqiag '/ar' o'r/ovo fiiav Qsov ex aniqfiarog fiiv
Ja^td, nvsvfiarog 8s dyiov. (John vii. 42.)
Magnes. c. 8. 2. JStg ©eog iariv, 6 cpavsqioaag savrdv did
'lyanv Xqiarov rov v'lnv airov, og ianv airov Xoyog, dnd
aiyfjg 7xqosXdwv,^ og xaTa 7tdvTa eiyqiaryaev rep nifi-
xpavrt airdv. (John viii. 29.)
Trail, c. 8. ~ "^Yfieig ovv t^v nqavnddeiav dvaXa^dvreg dvaxzi-
aaade eavrovg iv niarei, '6 ianv adq^ rov Kvqiov, '/at iv dydny,
0 effTtv aifia 'lyaov Xqiarov. (John vi. 51.)
Bom. c. 7. 1. '0 dqywv rov alwvog rovrov diaqndaai fie (iov-
Xerai (compare rov '/da fiov in John xii. 31; xiv. 30; xvi. 11).
Bom. c. 7. 2.^* "Fdw^ de tdv, '/at XaXovv iv ifiot, s'awdiv fiot
Xiyov "8svqo 7cqng rdv nariqa." Ovx ydnfiat rqocpy cpd-oqdg,
ot'de fj8ovalg rov (iiov roirov dqrov Qeov diXw, b iart adq^
'lyaov Xqiarov, rov ix aniqfiarog Aa§i8' '/at ndfia diXco rd
aifta avrov, o effTtv dydny dcpdaqrog. (John vi. 32, 33, 54-58;
iv. 14.)Philad. 2. 1. Ti'/va ovv cpiordg dXrjdsiag, cpsvysre rdv fieqi-
Ofidv '/at rdg '/axo8i8aa'/aXiag' 'onov 8s b notjiyv sartv, i'/sl wg
7r qd^ara dxoXovdelre. (Johu x. 4; xii. 26.)
Philad. 1.1. El ydq xat '/ard adq'/a fii Ttveg ydiXyaav nXa-
vfjaai, aXXd rd nvevfia ov nXavdrat, a7cd Qeov bv otdev ydq
nddev tq'yerat, VtMt nov vndyet, xai Ta xqvnrd iXiyyei. (Johu
iii. 8.)
Philad. 9. 1. KaXot '/at ol leqelg, '/qeiaacov de 6 aqyieqeig
b ne7Ciarevfiivog rd dyia rcov dyicov, og fidvog neniarevrai rd
'/qvnrd rov Qeov' avrdg wv diqa rov narqdg, dt' fjg elaiq-
Xovrai 'A^qadfi '/at laadx '/at laxco^ '/at ol nqocpyzai xat ol
dnnarnXnt '/at fj ix'/Xyaia. (John x. 7.)
^ Compare Basilides below, p, 173 ; and Tatian.
s In this passage occur Tcdp.a 0£ou, wliile it is no'oi; in John vi. 55 ; and
aEVvao; ^ootJ, while guiQ aWvto; is the ordinary phrase in John.

BASILIDES. ACTS OP PILATE. 173

5. Basilides. ^
Hippol. Eef. Haer. VII. 22. 'Enst d' yv 'dnoqov slnslv nqn-
§oXqv Tiva rnv fifj 'dvrog Qsav ysynvivai rt oi'/ 'dv, — cpsvyet ydq
naw xat 8i8oi'/e rdg '/ard nqo^nXfjv rcov yeyovnrcov niaiag b
BaaiXei8qg — yro/ag ydq nqnjinXfjg 'yqela, 'fj nniag 'vXrjg vTCndsaig,
'iva '/dofiov Qedg sqydaqzai, '/addnsq b dqd'yvrjg rd fiyqvftara, rj
dvrjrdg dvdqwnog yaX'/dv 'rj '%vXov, y n rcov Tjjg i)A?;g jieqcov iq-
ya'Qdfievog Xafi^dvei; 'AXXd elns, cpyat, '/at iyivsrn, '/at rnvrn
ianv, cog Xiyovatv ol dvdqeg nvrni, rd Xeydiv V7cd Mcoaicog'
revqd-rjrco cpiog, xat iyivsro cpcog. Hddsv, cpqat, yiyovs rd
cpwg; i^ oidevng' ni ydq yiyqanrai, cpqat, ndd-sv, dXX' aird fid
vov ex T^g cpcovyg -rov Xiyovrog, b di Xiywv, cpqaiv, oix fjv, oi8E
TO ysvdfievov yv. liynvs, cprjatv, i^ oi'/ 'dvrcov rd aniqjta rnv
'/dofiov, 6 Xoyog b Xsydelg' yevqdyrio cpcog, '/at rovrn, cpqaiv,
tan TO Xeydfievov iv rolg eiayysXinig' 'Hv rd cpcog rd dXy-
divdv, 0 cpcori'Qst 7cdvra avdqwnov iq'yd fisvov sig rdv
'/oafiov. Aafi[idvet rdg dqydg dnd tov aniqfiarog ixsivov '/at
cpioriKsrai. (John i. 9.)
Hippol. Bef. Haer. VII. 27. "Oti de, cpqaiv, 's'/aarnv Idiovg
sjst '/aiqovg txavog o acoryq Xiycov Ovnio y/et y wqa finv
'/at ni fiayoi rdv aariqa rsdsafiivoi' yv ydq, cpqat, '/at avzdg
vnd yivsaiv aariqcov xat dqwv dnn'/araardaswg iv np fisydXiij
7cqoXsXoyiafiivog awqcp. (John ii. 4.)
6. Acts of Pilate.
C. 6. '0 di 'Inv8alog s'cpq' 'Eyd rqid/ovra o'/rco s'rq iv '/Xivy
'/ars'/sifiyv iv d8vvy ndvcov. . . . Kat I8c6v fis 6 'iqaovg ianXay-
yviad-ij xat Xoyov siniv fioi' 'Aqdv aov rdv '/qd^(iarov '/at ns-
' On Basilides see Introduction, Because of its special importance the passage
is given here to complete the chain of testimony on the Fourth Gospel, For
further references in Gnostic writers see below, " Testimony of Heretics," There
can be no doubt that the quotations in the text are from John. The question
is whether Basilides or a Basilidean of later date made them. On this see Intro
duction, where the conclusion is that the reference is (as is natural) to Basilides
himself It is to be observed that the use of Xe)^3ev yE'^paTCTai, o' Xo'yo; o Xe)(-
SeI;, to X£y6[/.evov to mark quotation from the Old Testament and from the New
is significant. He also says, ^v TOf; EuayyEXfoi;: pointing to a collection, or at least
to an understood number.

174 GOSPEL OF JOHN.
qindrsi. Kat yqa rdv xqd^^ardv fiov '/at nsqisndrqaa . . . iv
aaf^jSarcj). (Compare John v. 2.)
[Note. — Justin twice quotes a work to which he gives this narae. Thus he
says, after quoting some incidents of the crucifixion of Jesus, Apol. I, u, 35,
p, 76 C, : Kol TauTa oti ysyovE, SuvaaSE [laSEiv £x tuv ^nt llovTiou FltXaTou
YEvojAEvuv "AxTUV, And so also in nearly the same words, Apol. I. c, 48,
p. 84 C, Compare also a more general reference, Apol, I. c. 38, p. 77 B, So
also Tertullian (Apologet. c. 21), after recounting the incidents of the Death
and Burial and Resurrection of Jesus, says : Ea omnia super Christo Pilatns,
et ipse jam pro sua conscientia Christianns, Caesari tunc Tiberio nuntiavit.
See Tisch., Evangelia Apocrypha, Proleg. p. LXH, &c,, for a full discussion
of the age of the Christian document known as the "Acts of Pilate." Although
interpolated at a later time, and although it is very unlike what an official
report of the procurator to the Emperor would have been, it seems to be of
very old date, and, as part of the so-called " Gospel of Nicodemus, " is well
known. If the book we now have is substantially that which Justin referred
to, believing it to be a, standard document, it is valuable evidence for the
previous existence of the Gospel of John, on which it is largely based. See,
e.g., chapter iii. Tisch,, Ev, Apoc, p, 218. Its title in the MSS is not
".^xTo, as in Justin, hut 'Yn:o(iVY)jjiaTa, Eusebius (H, E. H, 2) and Epipha
nius (Haer, L. 1) testify to the existence of such a book; and the Emperor
Maximin caused a heathen and anti-christian book under the same title to be
widely circulated, and even to be committed to memory by boys at school.]
7. POLTCARP.
See under 1 John.'
8. Martyrdom of Polycarp.
14. 2. EiXoycT) as on y§icoadg fis ... eig dvdaraaiv Lcoyg
alcovinv ipvxfjg re '/at acofiarng iv dcpdaqaicx nvevfiarog dyinv' iv
nig nqoade'ydeirjv ivdnidv aov afjfieqov iv dvaia niovi '/at nqoa-
8e'/ry, xadwg nqorjroifiaaag '/at nqoecpaviqcoaag '/al inXfjqcoaag,
6 d\pev8fjg '/at dXqdivdg Qedg. (John v. 29; xvii. 3.)
9. Hermas.
Mand. XII. 3. 5. 'Edv av asavrip nqndjjg 'on dvvavrat cpv-
' The words of Polycarp, c. VII. are from 1 John iv, 3, and the Gospel and
Epistle hang together so closely that the quotation has its value under the head
of the Gospel.

HERMAS. 175
Xaydyvai, si'/dncog ai'rdg [sc. Tag ivroXdg'} cpvXd^sig, -/at nvx
I'aovrai axXyqai. (John xiv. 12; vi. 60.)
Sim. V. 5. 2. '0 de dovXog b vldg rov Qeov iariv al de dfi-
nsXoi b Xadg ovrdg ianv nv avzdg icpvzevaev ol di ydqa-/eg ol
aytnt dyyeXoi elai rov Kvqiov ol avy/qarnvvveg rnv Xactv airov'
al di (inrdvai al i'/renXfiivat ix rnv dfineXwvog, [al] dvofiiat
elat rdv 8ovXiov rnv Qsov' rd 8i idiofiara a snsftrpsv ix roij
8ei7cvov, al ivrnXai slaiv ag e'dwxe np Xaip airnv 8id rnv v'lov
avrov' ol 8i cpiXni '/at avfifiovXoi, ol dyioi dyysXni ol nqcozni
XTiadivrsg- fj de d7cn8qftia zov 8sa7cdTOv, b yqdvog b nsqiaasviov
sig T))v naqovaiav aizov. ^
Sim. V. 6. 2. "Ozi, cpqaiv, b Qsdg rdv dfinsXwva icpvzsvas,
TOVT san, rdv Xadv s'/nas -/at 7i:aqidco/s np vlip aizov' '/at o
viog '/ariaryas rovg dyyiXovg i7c' airovg rov avvzyqslv avzovg-
'/at avrdg rdg dfiaqriag aircZv i'/addqias noXXd '/onidaag -/at
noXXnvg '/nnovg yvrXy/cog' nidstg ydq [dfinsXdv] 8vvazai ffxa-
cpfjvai dzeq '/dnnv y finydov.^
Sim. V. 6. 3. Avzdg ovv '/udaqiaag rdg dfiaqriag rov Xaoij
sdei^ev avroig rdg rqljiovg rfjg 'Cwqg, dovg airolg rdv vdfiov ov
e'^a/ie naqd rov narqdg aizov. (John x. 18; xii. 49, &c.)
S'lm. IX. 12. 1. Hqcozov, cpyfit, ndvrwv, Kvqis, rnvrn fiot
dyXwanv fj nirqa xat y nvXq rig ianv; ^11 7tiTqa, cpyatv, avrij
'/at fj nvXrj 6 t;tog rov Qsov iari. Hwg, cpyfit, Kvqie, fj nirqa
naXaid ianv, fj 8i nvXq xaivfj; "A'/ove, cpqat, '/at aivie, davvsrs'
0 fiiv v'ldg roi Qsov ndarjg rfjg xTi'ffewg airov nqoysviazsodg
sartv, loars avfi(in-vXov avrdv ysviad-ai rip 7iazqt rfjg xriascog ai
rov ' 8id TOVTO '/at naXaidg ianv. 'H de nvXy 8iaTt xatvfj, cpqfit,
Kvqis; "On, cpqaiv, S7i' iaydnov Tt^v fjfisqdv rfjg awzsXsiag cpa-
vsqdg iyivezo, did rovro '/aivfj iyivero y 7ZvXq, iva ol fiiXXovreg
adCeadai 8t' airfjg elg rfjv [SaaiXeiav elaiXdcoat rov Qeov. . . .
' This passage was mentioned in a note under " The Apostolical Fathers and
the Synoptists." It is given here as an example of Hermas's relation to St John.
Many passages in John are suggested by it. The £vToXa£ suggest many passages
in chapters xii.-xvii, ; 1 John ii. 3, &c. But the whole of the suggestions are pro
voking rather than satisfactory, when words and phrases are considered; they
come much closer when their theology is studied. The dignity, mission, and suf
ferings of God's Son are prominent in Hermas's teaching, and remind us of the
Fourth Gospel at every turn. Compare also the following extract, and compare
John XV. with Sim. VIII,
^ See last note. Compare also Mark xii, 1 ; Heb, v, 8, 9 ; Isaiah v, 7.

176 GOSPEL OP JOHN.
'Edv ydq eig ndXiv dsXrjayg slasXdslv rtvd, '/d'/sivy y ndXig ns-
qiTsreixiafiivrj '/v'/Xqi '/at fiiav s'xsl nvXyv, fiyn dwyay sig rfjv
ndXiv i'/sivyv slasXdelv el fifj 8id T^g niXyg j;g e'^et; 77wg ydq,
cpyfit, Kvqie, 8vvaTai yeviadat dXXwg; El ovv elg rfjv ndXiv nv
8vvfjay elasXdelv el fifj 8td rfjg n-vXyg airyg, omw, cpyat, xat elg
TTjv jSaatXeiav rov Qeov dXXwg eiaeXdsiv oi 8vvaraL avdqwnng
sl fifj 8id TOV nvdfiarog rov vlov airov rov yyanyfiivov vn
avrov. ^
10. Justin Martyr.
Apol. I. c. 5. p. 56 A. 'HXiyydy ravra . . . vn' airov rov Xo
yov fioqcpcodivrog '/at dvdqconov ysvofiivnv '/at 'lyaov Xqiaroi
'/XydivTog. Apol. I. c. 21. p. 66 -E.I Tdv Xdynv, '6 ian nqwrov yiv-
vijfia TOV Qeov, dvsv snifii^iag cpda'/siv fifidg ysyevvfjadai , Iq
aovv Xqiardv rdv diddaxaXov fjficov. (John i. 1.)
Apol. L. c. 22. p. 67 E. El de xat id/wg Tra^a t^v xnivfjv yi
vsaiv ysysvvfjadat avrdv ex Qsnv Xiyofisv Xdyov Qsov, cog nqn-
icpyftsv. (Compare I. 21.)
Apol. L. c. 23. p. 68 C. Kat 'iqaovg Xqiardg fidvog Idicog vldg
rip Qsip yeyivvrjrai, Xnyng airnv vndqywv.
Apol. I. c. 32. p. 14: B. 'II di nqcory divajiig fierd rdv na
riqa ndvrwv '/at deandrrjv Qedv '/at v'ldg 6 Xoyog iaziv og riva
rqdnov aaq'/onoiydeig dvdqwnog yiyovev, sv rolg s^fjg iqovfisv.
(John i. 1.)
Apol. I. c. 35. p. 76 A. Kat ndXiv 6 auTog nqocpyryg 'Haaiag
dsocpoqovfisvog rep nvsvfian np nqocpyrixip scpy. . . . Alrovai
fis vvv '/qiaiv. . . . Kat ydq, dg sinsv b nqocpfjvyg, diaavqovrsg
airdv k/ddiaav int (ifjfiazog '/at slnov Kqlvov fjfilv.^ (Isa. Iviii.
2; John xix. 13.)
2 Compare John x,, &c, also Hegesipp. ap, Eus. H. E. II. 23. 8 ; Ignat. ad
Philad. 0, 9. 1 ; Clem. Hom. III. 52.
• There are several passages in Justin which may be referred to the Prologue
of John's Gospel. They seem to show that Justin's theology was grounded upon
John. The use of (jlovoyevH]'; in connection with the mention of the "Memoirs"
is interesting, and looks as if the Fourth Gospel were included. See Dial. c. 105,
p, 332 C, below. It is certain that Justin knew the Apocalypse (Dial, c. 81), but
he does not quote Apoc, xix. 13, in which it is said, "His name shall be called the
Xo'yo; of God. "
' Justin is arguing for the fulfilment of the prophecy of Isaiah-; and it is sug
gested (see Drummond in Theol. Rev,, July 1877) that he quotes the words of the

JUSTIN MARTYR. 177
Apol. I. c. 53. p. 88 A. Tivt ydq 'dv Xdyqi dvdqdncj) azav-
qcodivrt insiddfisda, bzi 7Cqcozdrn'/ng np dyevvqrip Qscp ian.
Apol. L. c. 61. p. 94 A. Kat ydq b Xqiazdg slnsv 'Av fiy
avayevvTjdfjre, oi fifj elaeXdrjre elg tjJv ^aatXeiav riov
ov qavcov. Ort di '/at ddivarov, elg rdg fifjrqag rdv re/nvacov
rnvg d7ra§ yevvwfiivovg ifi(ifjvai, cpaveqdv ndaiv iart.^
Apol. L. c. 63. p. 95 B. '0 Xoyog di rov Qeov ianv b v'ldg
avrnv. Apol. I. c. 66. p. 98 A. Jid Xdynv Qeov aaq'/nnnirjdstg 'Irj
aovg Xqiardg b acoryq fjficov, '/at adq'/a '/at aifia vniq acozyqiag
fjficov saysv.^
Apol. LI. c. 6. p. 44 B. '0 de vldg i'/sivov, b iidvog Xsyofis-
vng '/vqicog vldg, n Xdyng nqd rdv noiyjidrwv '/at avvcov '/at
ysvvcofisvog, ors rfjv aqyfjv 8t avrov ndvra s'/nas '/at i'/dajiqae.
(Compare Dial. c. 62. p. 285 D.)
Bial. c. 48. p. 267 B. Td ydq Xiyetv ae nqo'vndq'yeiv Qedv
dvra nqd aldvcov rovzov rdv Xqiardv, ejra '/at ysvvqdfjvat 'dv
dqconov ysvdfisvov V7cnfielvat '/.r.X.
Bial. c. 62. p. 285 B. 'AXXd rovrn rd np 'dvzt dnd rnv na
rqdg nqnfiXydiv yivvqfia nqd ndvrcov rdv notyjtdrwv avvfjv rip
narqt, '/at rovrcj) b narfjq nqoaofiiXsl.
Bial. C. 63. p. 286 C. "On a'iqszat dnd rfjg yfjg y Kwfj airov ¦
oi doxel aot XsXiydat cog oix i^ dvdqdncov exovrog to yivog rov
did rdg avofiiag rov XaoiJ elg ddvazov naqa8s8dadat slqqfiivov
ind rov Qsov; (John i. 13.)
Bial. c. 69. p. 295 B. Tovg ex yeverfjg '/at '/azd zfjv adqxa
7Trjqovg '/at '/cocpovg '/at yi'^Xovg Idaaro, rdv fiiv dXXsadai, rdv di
'/at d'/ovsiv, 'zdv 8i '/at bqdv rip Xdyiij airov notyaag. (John ix.
1 &c.) (See also Apol. I. c. 22. p. 68 B. ex yeveT^g novqqovg.)
Gospel, changing £xa3i(JEV into ix.a'iicm, and making it transitive. In c. 32
Justin adds to the Synoptic account of Christ riding on an ass the statement that
it was bound to a vine, so as to connect it with Gen, xlix. 11 ; and it is supposed
that he similarly adds xpivov iqVf^ '" fi^ Johannine narrative, in order to connect
it with Isaiah's ahoZal [jie vuv xptoiv. See Hilg., Die Evang, Justins, p. 224.
° The preceding words refer to Baptism in the name of the Trinity (as in
Matthew's Gospel). The Gospel of Matthew is thus joined with that of John.
The reading paa. tuv oupavuv in John's Gospel is adopted by Tischendorf after s.
The same reading is fouud in Clem. Hom. XI. 26 (quoted in our text, below);
Apost. Constt. &c. see Tisch,, Gr. Test, in loc. The '''Oti Se x.t.X. clearly refers
to John. * See Dial, t, 70, p, 297 A. atunaTOUOieraSat. 12

178 GOSPEL OF JOHN.
Bial. c. 88. p. 316 B. Ol dvdqwnot v7CsXdfi^avov airdv st
vat rdv Xqtardv nqdg ovg /at airdg ifioa' Oi'/ slfil b Xqiardg,
dXXd cpwvfj fiodvrog. (John i. 40.)
Bial. c. 105. p. 332 C. BInvoysvfjg ydq 'on yv np narqt TttJv
o^wv ovrog, tdt'wg e| airov Xdyog '/at dvvafiig yeyevvy fiivog , '/at
vareqov avdqconog 8id rfjg naqdivov ysvdfisvog, cog and rcov
anofivyfiovsvfidrcov ifiddofisv, 7Tqos8fjXwaa.^ (John i. 18.)
Bial. c. 114. p. 342 B. 'Iiv al '/aq8iat o'vrwg neqirerfiyfii-
vai slatv and rfjg novyqiag, dg xat yaiqstv anodvfja'/nvrag did
rd 'dvofia rd rfjg xa^^g nirqag, '/at tcov 'v8wq ralg '/aq8iaig twv
8t avrov ayaacyadvrwv rdv nariqa twv bXiov ^qvovaijg, '/at no-
ritovayg rovg (iovXofiivovg rd T^g t^ofjg vdwq nielv. (John iv. 10.)
Bial. c. 123. p. 353 B. Qsov ri'/va aXydtvd /aXovfisda '/at
iofiEv, ol rag ivroXdg rov Xqiarov cpvXdaaovrsg. (John i. 12;
compare 1 Johi> iii. 1-3.)
Be Resurrect, c. 1. p. 588 C. Ov ysvdfisvog vldg b Xdyng yX-
dsv sig fjfidg, adqxa cpoqiaag, savrdv rs /at rdv 7cariqa fiyvvcov,
8i8ovg fjfilv iv savnp rqv ex vs'/qcov avdaraatv '/at rfjv fisrd
ravra Cwi^v alwvtov. (John xi. 25.)
Be Besurrect. c. 9. p. 594 B. Kat iprjXacpdv avrdv inirqsnsv
avroig, '/at rovg rvnovg rcov 5^Ac(>v ev Tatg yeqatv inedeixws.
(John XX. 27.)
Be Besurrect. c. 9. p. 594 E. BovXdfisvog iniSsl^ai xat rovro,
{-/addg s't'qy/sv iv oiqavip rfjv '/aroi'/yaiv fjficov vndqxsiv) on oi/
d8vvarov '/at aaq'/t sig niqavdv dvsXdslv. (John xiv. 2.)
Exposit. fid. 15. p. 387 A. 'O Xdyog adq^ ysvdfisvog rovg ov
qavovg ov '/ariXi7CS.
[Note. In an able article in the 'Theological Review' (April 1877), Pro
fessor Drummond shows that Justin cannot have been ignorant of the Fourth
Gospel, because of his use of the word Xoyo;- He uses it in its special theo
logical sense 27 times out of 67 in Apol. I. ; 16 out of 28 in Apol. II, ; 7 out
of 235 in the Dialogue. Christ or the Xo'yo; is called 0eo; once in the
Apology, and "a great number of times (I have counted upwards of 34) in
the Dialogue,"
"• Justin's usual word for Christ is TipojTo'TOXo;. Thus Apol, I. u, 46. p, 83
says TOV XptOTOV TtpiOTo'TOxov TOU ©EOU Elvai £6i8ax,Sirm£v. There are attempts
(see Hilg., Die Evang. Justins, p. 301) to show that the use of (jiovoyeviq; here
is from Psalm xxii, 21, It is true that Justin was dealing with that Psalm in the
passage immediately before, but it must be remembered that the reference in our
quotation is not to the Psalm, but to the Memoirs,

LETTER TO DIOGNETUS. 179
Those who try to make out that Justin describes tho Logos as springing
frora God, in the first instance, at the creation of tho world, while John
makes the Logos earlier, do not attach due weight to the following : Justin
says, the Son is TtpwTOTOXo; to the unbegotten God, Apol, I, 53-63 ; and again
Apol. II, 6 says, the Logos was with God begotten before all His works ;
also calls Him YEVvr^jjia before the creation icavTUv tcov TCOfi5|xaTtov; and calls
Christ also o ©so';. Dial, c, 56, 75, Though Justin's doctrine savoured more
of the Alexandrian theosophy than John's, it was substantially the same.
John, Colossians, and Justin are at one. We may add that Justin speaks of
the Holy Spirit in connection with His functions of conferring prophetic and
other spiritual gifts. His aim was to establish Christ's Divinity; and he
does not set himself to speak of the Holy Spirit's Divine Personality, But he
does not speak of Him as an offspring or emanation. See Donaldson's Chris
tian Literature and Doctrine, II, 264,
The following additional passages may be regarded as "echoes" of the
Fourth Gospel. The list might be increased, but these seem the most im
portant : —
ApoL I. c. 6, p. 56 C, comp. John iv. 24; Apol. I. c, 13, p, 60 D, comp,
John xviii. 37; Apol, I. t. 52. p. 87 E, comp. John .\ix. 37; Apol. I. u. 63.
p. 95 D, corap. John xiv. 24, and xvi. 3 ; Apol. I. c. 66, p. 98 A, comp.
John vi, 5, &c. Dial, c, 17. p. 235 B, comp, John i. 9; Dial, t, 56. p, 276
D, comp. John i. 19; xii. 49; Dial, t, 63. p. 286 D, comp. John i. 13;
Dial, c. 64. p, 288 D, comp. John i, 1, 14; Dial, c, 69. p. 295 D, comp, John
iv, 10, 14; Ibid, p. 296 A, comp, John vii. 12; Dial. t. 91. p. 319 A,
comp. John iii. 14-16; Dial. t. 100. p. 326 C, comp. John x. 18; Dial,
c. 121. p. 350 B, comp, John xiv. 7; Dial, c, 140, p, 369 D, comp, John
iv. 34; xiv. 24, &c,, and see also Dial. c. 91. p. 319 A.]
11. Letter to Diognetus.
C. VII. p. 498 B. AXX' airdg dXyddg 6 7cavzo-/t.qdrwq '/at
ncivro'/riarqg xat ddqarog Qsdg, airdg dn ovqavcov rfjv aXfj-
deiav xat rdv Xdyov rdv dyinv '/at aneqivdyrov avdqcorcoig ivi-
dqvae '/at sy/arsar'fjqi^s ralg '/aqdiaig avrdv.
C. X. p. 500 B. '0 ydq Qsdg rovg dvdqdnovg yydnyae, di
otg i7tnirjae rdv '/da fiov, otg vnira^e jra'vTa Ta ev rjj yy, ...
sT^og o"g dniareiXe rdv vldv airov rdv fiovoyevfj, oig rfjv iv ov
qavip (iaaiXeiav snyyyeiXaro '/at ddasi rnig dyanfjaaaiv avrdv.
(John iii. 16.)
C. XL. p. 501 B. Obrog (sc. Xdyog) b dn' dqyyg b '/aivng
cpavsig, '/at naXaidg svqs'ysig, '/at ndvrnrs viog iv ay tcov '/aq
diaig ysvvdfievog. O'vcng b det, afjfieqov vldg Xoytadeig' 8i ov
nXovriterai fj i'/'/Xyaia, '/at x«?<S dnXovfiivq iv ayioig nXqdv-
12*

180 GOSPEL OP JOHN.
VST at , naqiyovaa vovv, cpavsqovaa fivar'fjqia, StayysXXovaa '/ai
qovg, yaiqovaa snt niarolg, inityrovai 8coqovfiivq, otg oqia ni
arscog oi dqavsrai oi8s bqia narsqwv naqoqiterai. (John i. 1.)
12. Acts of Paul and Thecla. ^
C. 5. Ma/dqioi ol dnora^dfievot np '/daficj) rovro/, on
airot evdelg '/Xydrjaovrai.^ (John xii. 31.)
C. 25. '0 '/aiqdg alaxqdg, '/at av evfioqcpog' fiy aXXog
ae netqaa fidg X'qxperat x^tqiov rov nqwrov. (John V. 14.)
C. 29. Aevqn nqdaev^at vniq rov rs'/vov fiov, 'iva ^^fferat
etg TOt'g aldvag. (John vi. 51, 58.)
13. Letter of the Church of Vienne and Lyons.
Eus. H E.y. 1. p. 303. Burt. ZyXov Qeov noXvv sycov, '/at
tiwv np nvevfian . . . ejjwv di rdv naqd'/Xyrov iv savnp, to
nXslov TOV Zaxaqiov. (John xiv. 26.)
LUd. p. 305. Burt. 'EnXyqovro de rd vnd rov Kvqiov fjfidv
slqyfiivov, 'on iXsvasrai '/atqdg, sv cp ndg 6 dnoxrsivag vfidg,
dd^et Xarqeiav nqoacpiqetv rip Qecp. (John xvi. 2.)
14. Tatian. ^
Orat. c. Graec. p. 158 B. Toiovrovg fjfidg 'dvrag fii) dnoarv-
yfjaare, dXXd naqatryadfievot rovg daijiovag Qeip rip fxovcjt '/ara-
'xoXovdfpare. Hdvra vn airov, '/at x^Q'-S airov yiyovs ovdi sv.
(John i. 3.)
Ihid. p. 152. Kat rovro sartv dqa rd slqqfiivov fj ffxoTt'a
TO ipdg oi xaraXafi^dvsi ... 6 Xdyog fiiv iart rd rov QsofJ cpwg.
(John i. 5.)
Ihid. p. 145. (DavsqwTsqog di i'/dfjaofiat rd fjfiirsqa. Qedg
yv iv dqxfj, rfjv de dqyfjv Xdyov 8vvafitv naqstXycpafisv. '0 ydq
' Acts of Paul and Thecla. See Introduction, "Apocryphal Literature.'' This
Book is probably that to which Tertullian refers (De Baptismo, u, 17), and dates
from some time after the middle of the second century.
' The words occur in a speech ascribed to Paul which contains quotations
from the Sermon on the Mount and from the Pauline Epistles in the form of
Beatitudes. » See before, page 72, note 1.

TATIAN. ATHENAGORAS. 181
8sanorrjg riov oXwv avrdg vndqycov rov navrdg fj vndaraaig, /ard
fiiv Tjjv fi-qdinco ysysvyfiivyv nniyaiv fidvog yv, /add de Traffa
8vvafiig, oqariHv rs '/at anqdnov airdg vndaraatg yv avv ainp
rd ndvra' avv ainp ydq did Xnyi'/fjg 8vvdfiswg, airdg '/at
n Xdyog og fjv iv avnp vniarqas. QsXrjfian de T^g dnXdryrog
avrov nqonyd^ Xdyog' b de Xdyog ov '/ard '/evov ywqyaag, sqyov
nqwrnro'/ov rov nvsvfiarog yivsrat . . . ovrco '/at b Xdyog nqo-
sXdwv ex T^g Toi' narqdg dvvdfiscog, oix dXoyov nenoiy/e rdv
yeyevvrj'/dra . . . xat xaddneq b Xdyog ev dqxfj yevydetg, dvze-
yivvqae tiJv '/ad' fjfidg noiyaiv, airdg savnp rfjv vXyv dyfiiovq-
yyaag, ovrco '/dyd rfjv rov Xdyov fiifiyaiv dvaysvvqdstg , '/at ttjv
Toii dXydovg '/araXfjipiv nsnoiyfiivog, ftsraqidfiitw rfjg avyysvovg
i'^^g TIJV aiyyvaiv. (John i, 1.)
Ihid. p. 144. Hvsvfia 6 ©eog . . . dXX' ovdi rdv ovwvdfia-
arnv Qsdv 8wqo8o'/yriov. (John iv. 24.)

15. Athenagoras.
Legatio. p. 10. 'AXX' sartv 6 vldg Qsov, Xdyog rov
narqdg, iv Idiq xat ivsqysia' nqdg airov ydq '/at 8i avrov
7cdvra iyivsro, svdg 'ovrog rov narqdg '/at rov vlov. "Ovrog 8e
vlov EV narqt, '/at narqdg iv vlip, f-vdryri xat dvvdfiSL nvev
fiarog, vovg '/at Xdyog rov narqdg, 6 Diog rov ©eoC. (John i.
1-3; xvii. 21-23.)
Ihid. p. 10. 'E^ oiqxyg ydq 6 ©eog, vovg di'dtog wv, stysr
airdg iv savnp rdv Xdyov, dtdicog Xoyi'/dg wv. (John i.)
Ibid. p. 12. "Avdqwnoi de, tov ^ueV ivravda nXiynv xal fiL-
'/qov rtvog d^iov §iov XsXoyiafiivot vnd fidvov ds naqansfind-
fisvoi roirov, ov t'ffwg Qsdv '/at rdv naq' avrov Xdyov ei-
divai rig fj rov natddg nqdg rdv nariqa svdrqg, rig fj rov na
rqdg nqdg rdv vldv xoivwvt'a, ti to nvsvfia, rig fj rcov roaovrwv
evwffig, '/at dtaiqsaig svovfiivwv, rov nvsvfiarog, rofj natddg, rov
narqdg' noXv de '/at xqsiTTOva 'y slnslv Xdyqi, rdv sxdsxdfisvov
(Iiov slddrsg, sdv '/adaqot 'dvrsg dnd navrdg naqaneficpdwfiev
ddi'/rjfiarog fisxqt roaoirov de cptXavdqwndrarot , coare fifj fiovov
ariqyetv rovg cpiXovg {sdv ydq dya7tdre, cpyatv, rovg ayandvrag,
'/at daveitere rolg 8avsi'Qovatv vfilv, riva fiiadov 's^sre; roiovrot
de ^^tteig ovTeg, '/at rdv roiovrov ^tdvvreg §iov, 'sva xqtdfjvai

182 GOSPEL OF JOHN.
Siacpvycofisv , dniarovfieda deoae^elv. (John xvii. 3. Compare
Luke vi. 34, 35.) 16. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. II. c. 22. p. 100. "Odsv 8t8da/nvai fjfidg al dyiat
yqacpat, '/at ndvrsg ol nvsvfiarncpnqot, i^ dv 'icoavvyg Xiyst ' ' ev
aq'/rj yv b Xdyog' '/at 6 Xdyng yv nqdg rdv Qsnv dsi'/vvg 'on iv
nqcornig finvog yv b Qsdg, '/at iv ainp b Xdyng. "Eneira Xiyet'
¦/at Qedg yv b Xdyog. Hdvra 8t' airov iyivsro, '/at ycoqtg airov
iyivsro oi8i 'sv. (John i. 1 &c.)
17. Muratorian Fragment. ^
See before, p. 3-8,
18. Irenaeus.
C. haeres. III. 11. 7. See before, p. 67.
Ibid. UL 11. 8. 9. See before, pp. 68, 69.
B. II. 22. 5. Hdvrsg ol nqsa^-vrsqot fiaqrvqovaiv , nl '/ard
rfjv Aaiav Iwdvvy np rov Kvqiov fiadyrjj avfi^s^Xy/nreg, naqa-
8e8co'/ivat ravra tov 'liodvvyv. Haqifieive ydq airolg fiiyqt nov
Tqa'iavov yqdvwv.
B. III. 1. 1. "Enetra 'Icodvvqg b fiadrjzyg rov Kvqiov, b xat
inl TO arfjdog airov dvaneadv, '/at airdg e^edwxe to eiayyiXiov,
iv 'Ecpiaqj rfjg 'Aaiag 8iarqi§wv.
B. III. 3. 4. Kat slatv ol dxyxodrsg airov , on 'Iwdvvqg , 6
rov Kvqiov fiadrjzfjg, iv rfj 'Ecpiaiji 7Coqsvdstg Xovaaadai, '/at
l8cov I'aw Kyqivd-nv, i^qXaro rov (iaXavsiov fifj Xovadfisvog, dXX'
irrsindv cpiyiofisv, fifj xat rd ^aXctvslov avfiniay, s'vdov 'dvrog
Kyqivdov, rov rfjg dXydsiag ixdqov.
Ihid. AXXd '/at q iv 'Ecpiaii> i'/xXTfOia vnd HavXov fiiv rs-
dsfieXiiofiivy, 'icodvvov de naqafieivavrng airnlg fiiyqi zwv Tqaia-
vnv yqdvwv, fidqrvg aXydrjg iart rfjg riov d7rnarnXiov naqa8naecog.
1 Theophilus. This is the first quotation from John by name. See before,
page 73, note 1,
' The Muratorian Fragment may represent the Roman church in accepting
the Fourth Gospel,

IRENAEUS. POLYCRATES. 183
B. V. 36. 1, 2. 'fig nl 7rqea^vreqoL Xiyovai, rdre /at ol fiiv
¦/ara^tiodivreg T/Jg cv ovqavip diarqififjg, s'/slas "ycoqrjaovatv . . .
ol di rfjv ndXiv '/arni'/.qaovaiv Kat did rovrn slqy/ivai rdv Kv
qinv 'Ev TOtg rnv narqdg fiov fiovdg slvai jroXXdg. (John xiv. 2.)
B. III. 11. 1. Hanc fidera annuntians Joannes Doraini disci
pulus, volens per Evangelii annuntiationera auferre eura, qui a
Cerintho inseminatus erat hominibus errorem, et multo prius ab
his qui dicuntur Nicolaitae, qui sunt vulsio^ ejus quae falso co-
gnominatur scientiae, ut confunderet eos, et suaderet quoniam
unus Deus qui omnia fecit per Verbum suum; et non, quemad
modum illi dicunt, alterum quidem fabricatorera, alium autera
Patrem Domini: et ahum quidem fabricatoris filium, alterum
vero de superioribus Christum, quem et impassibilera perseve
rasse, descendentera in Jesura filiura fabricatoris, et iterum re-
volasse in suum Pleroma: et initium quidera esse Moiiogenem;
Logon autem verum filium Unigeniti: et eam conditionem, quae
est secundum nos, non a prirao Deo factam, sed a Virtute ali
qua valde deorsum subjecta, et abscissa ab eorura communica
tione, quae sunt invisibilia et innominabilia. Orania igitur talia
circurascribere volens discipulus Domini, et regulam veritatis coii-
stituere in Ecclesia, quia est unus Deus omnipotens, qui per Ver
bum suum omnia fecit, et visibilia et invisibilia; significans quo
que, quoniam per Verbum, per quod Deus perfecit conditionem,
in hoc et salutem his qui in conditione sunt praestitit homini
bus; sic inchoavit in ea quae est secundum Evangehura doctrina:
"In principio erat Verbum."
19. Polycrates.
Eus. H.E.N. 31.* "En 8i '/at 'Iwdvvqg b int rd arfjdog
TOV Kvqiov dvansacov, og iyevrjdy leqevg rd niraXov nscpo-
qrj'/cog '/at fidqrvg xai 8i8da'/aXog' ovrog iv 'Ecpiacji xe/oifirjzat.
(John xiii. 25.)
1 Irenaeus. Vulsio, graece aTto'(J7i:aajji.a, surculus.
' Polycrates, See this passage below in the Appendix to John's Gospel —
Helps in the study of the Paschal Controversy, Polycrates was a contemporary
of Irenaeus, The passage occurs in his letter to Victor of Rome,

184 GOSPEL OF JOHN.

20. Clement of Alexandria. ^
Eus. H. E. VL 14.
Ibid. III. 23. ""A'/ovaov fivdov oi fivdov, dXXd 'dvza Xdyov,
7ceqt 'icodvvov zoi> dnoardXnv naqa8e8nfiivov , '/at fivfjfty naqa-
necpvXayfiivov. 'Enei8fj ydq rov rvqdvvov rs'Xsvrrja avrog and rfjg
Hdrfinv rfjg vfjaov fisryXdsv int rfjv 'Ecpeaov."

21. Tertullian. 1
Be praescript. haereticor. c. 36. (See before, p. 48.)
Adv. Marcion. IV. 2. (See before, p. 75.)
Ibid. IV. 5. (See before, p. 79.)
Adv. Prax. c. 23. Haec quomodo dicta sunt, evangelizator
et utique tam clarus discipulus Joannes, magis quara Praxeas
novit. 22. Clementine Homilies, i
Hom. III. 25. (Dovevg ydq rjv '/at ipevaryg /at fisrd
dfiaqricdv yavydtsiv fiydi snt np dqyeiv diXwv. (John viii. 44.)
Hom. III. 52. Aid rovro airdg dXydfjg iov nqncpqryg eXeyev '
"'Eyw elfii fj niXy rfjg t'-'^^S' b dt ifinv elaeqydfievog
elaiqyerat sig T'fjv ^wjyv" wg ot'x ovayg sriqag rfjg aw^eiv
dvvafiivqg 8i8aa'/aXiag. . . . Kal ndXiv Td ifid nqd^ara
d'/ovsL.ryg ififjg cpwvfjg. (John x. 9, 27.)
Hom. XL 26. Owwg ydq fjfilv wfioasv b nqocpfjrrjg slncov
dfifjv Vfilv Xiyco, idv fifj dvaysvvydyrs vdari tiovrt, slgovofia
narqdg, vlnD, dyiov nvsijiarog, ov ftfj siaiXdyrs eig ti)v /?a-
aiXsiav riov oiqavcov. (John iii. 5.)
' See before, page 75, for Clement's statement that John, writing after the
other Evangelists, was inspired to make a Gospel of a spiritual character, Clement
represents the church in Alexandria in accepting the Gospel of Johu.
1 Tertidlian always used John's Gospel as an acknowledged authority. He
represents the African church in accepting the Gospel of John.
' See Introduction, "The_.Clemeiitines," Tlio third extract in the text (from
Hom, XIX. 22) is in the portion of the work first published in 1853 by Dressei.
The special importance of this quotation in the controversy on the Fourth Gospel
suggests its insertion here. For further testimonies see below, " Testimony of He
retics," The text is from Lagarde (1865).

ORIGEN. dionysius OF ALEXANDRIA. EUSEBIUS. 185
Hom. XIX. 22. "Odsv '/at {8i8da'/^aXog fjfidv nsqt rov est ys-
vsrfjg nyqov xai avafiXiipavrog naq' airov i^srdl^cov iqwrqaaaiv,
sl ijfiaqr'jsv ovrog 'fj ol yovslg airov, {iva^ rvcpXdg yswydfj,
ansxqivaro' ovrs ovrdg rt rjfiaqrsv, o'vrs 6 yoveig airov,
dXX' iva 8i airov cpavsqcody fj 8-vvafitg rnv Qsnv Tryg
dyvolag Icofiivy rd dfiaqr-fjfiara. (John ix. 2, 3.)
For the testiraonies of Valentinus and Ptoleraaeus, and other
Gnostics, see below, "Testiraony of Heretics."
23. Origen. 1
Eus. H E. VL 25. (See before, pp. 8, 9.)
Hom. on Gen. XIII. (See before, p. 51.)
Hom. on Joshua VII. (See before, p. 52.)
Comment, in Joann. (See before, p. 83.)
Homil. in Luc. (See before, p. 81.)
Selecta in Genes. (Opp. II. p. 24.) 'Iwdvvqg rfjv 'Aaiav nqdg
ovg '/at diarqiipag iv 'Ecpiaiii rsXsvr^ ' ^
Comment, in Matt. (Opp. III. p. 719.) '0 de 'Pwfiaiwv /Safft-
>lei'g, t&g fj naqd8oaig 8i8da-/st, '/ars8i'/aas rdv 'iwdvvrjv fiaq-
rvqovvra did rdv zqg dXydsiag Xdyov, sig Hdrfinv t^v vfjaov. Ji-
ddaxst 8i rd nsqt rov fiaqrvqiov savrov Iwdvvqg, fifj Xiycov rig
airdv '/arsdixaas, cpdaxcov sv rjj 'Ano'/aXvxpsi ravra.
24. Dionysius of Alexandria.
Epist. ad Basilid. (See before, p. 86.)
Eus. H. E. VII. 25.1 (See below. Apocalypse.)
25. Eusebius. 1
H. E. III. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
LUd. III. 24. (See before, p. 87.)
> Origen has no doubt of John's Gospel; he wrote a commentary upon it.
2 See on John's age and death, Irenaeus III, 3.
> Dionysius (in the middle of the third century) opposed the Johannine
authorship of the Apocalypse (on grounds of style), but accepted the Gospel. See
page 86 and note.
» Eusebius, who coUected traditions from all quarters, has none to record

186 GOSPEL OP JOHN.
Ibid. III. 23. 'Ent rovrntg '/ard rfjv 'Aaiav sn rip (iiii) ns-
qiXsindfisvng airdg exeivog, ov fjyd7za 6 'lyaovg, dndaroXog ofiov
'/at eiayyeXtaryg 'icodvvqg rdg aizddr dtelnev sxxXyaiag, dnd rfjg
'/ard T^v vfjaov fisrd rfjv Aofisnavov rsXsvrfjv snavsXd-wv cpvyyg.
"Ozt di sig rovrovg np fiict) nsqtfjv, d7cdxqrj did dvo ntardaaadat
rdv Xdynv fiaqrvqwv. Hiarot 8' dv slev ovrot, rfjg i'/'/Xyaiaan-
'/fjg nqea^eiaavreg 6qdo8o§i.ag, el 8fj roiovrot Elqqvalog '/at KX-q-
fiyg b 'AXe^av8qsvg.
Chronic, ad ann. XIV. Bomitiani. Secundus post Neronem
Domitianus christianos persequitur, et sub eo apostolus Joannes
ad Patmum insulam relegatus Apocalypsin vidit.
26. Epiphanius.
Haeres. LI. (See before, p. 95.)
Haeres. LXIX. c. 23. I. 2. tom. 2. Aid '/at 6 'Iwdvvy g iXddv 6
fia'/dqiog, '/at svqdv rovg dvdqdnovg fjaxoXyfiivovg nsqt rfjv xdrco
Xqiaroi) naqovaiav , xat riov fiiv 'E§iiovaiwv nXavydivnov did
TIJV 'svaaq'/ov Xqiarov ysvsaXoyiav d7cd 'A^qadfi '/arayofiivyv, xat
Aov'/d dvayofiivqv dyqt rov 'Addfi, evqcirv de ToiJg Kyqivdiavovg
'/at Myqivdiavovg ex rcaqarqtfiyg avrdv Xiyovrag stvat rptXdv av-
d-qconov, '/at rovg Na^aqaiovg, '/at dXXag noXXdg alqiaeig, cog
'/ardniv iXdwv {riraqrog ydq ovrog siayysXitsrat), dqysrai dva-
'/aXsladat, wg slnslv, rovg nXavqdivrag, '/at -fjayoXyfiivovg nsqt
TIJV xa'TW Xqiarov naqovaiav, '/at Xiysiv airolg, dg xardniv §ai-
vcov, '/at oqdv nvdg elg rqaysiag bdovg '/s'/Xi'/drag , '/at acpivrag
rfjv sidelav '/at dXyd-tvfjv, cog einelv Hoi cpiqeade; not §a8i-
t,ere; Ol rfjv rqayslav bddv '/at a'/av8aXw8y, xat eig ydajia cpi-
qovaav ^a8it,ovTeg, dva'/dfirpare. Oi'/ sartv ovrwg' oix sartv
dnd Maqiag fidvov b Qsdg Adyog, b ex Harqdg dvwdsv yeye-
vy fiivog' oi'/ sartv dnd rcov yqdvcov 'icoafjcp tov TawTjyg bqfiaarnv' ^
oi'/ effTtv d7cd twv yqdvcov ^aXadiyX, '/at Zoqo^d§sX, /at Aa^td,
'/at 'Afiqadfi, '/at la'/wji, '/at Nios, xat 'Addfi' dXXd 'Ev dqyjj
yv 0 Adyog, '/at b Adyog yv 7cqdg rdv Qsdv, '/at Qsdg yv 6 Ad-
which bore against the authenticity of John's Gospel, Up to his time the Alogi
had been its sole opponents,
' Another reading is ap(j.oaTOU, but o"p|JiaaTOU is according to Epiphanius'
usage. He speaks of Joseph as betrothed to Mary in his old age ; thus following
the Apocryphal Gospels.

EPIPHANIUS. JEROME. 187
yog. Tn de yv, /at rjv, -/at yv, oiy vnn8iysrat rnv fifj elvai nore.
Kat bqdg nwg sidvg zd iyyvrdrco nqdznv ayfiaivsi. 'Qg Dlaz-
dalog fiiv rfjv bddv sdsi^s 8id rfjg ysvsaXoyiag; -/at ov8i airdg
ij/qi§wasv, aXX' insidfj dvwdev s'cpsqs '/ai roi ys tijv yevsaXnyiav
ndg rs b Mdq/og nsqt rcov iv np '/dafuji nsnqayfiarsvfiivwv,
'/at cpwvfjg fiocoaqg iv ry iqyfiii), nsqt rov Kvqiov rov did nqo-
cpqrwv nqo7CSCprjzsvfiivov, '/at vdfiov ncog zs 6 Aov/dg dnd rcov
•/arco int rd avco dvrjysv, iavarsqnv iXddv. Tsraqrog 6 'iwdvvyg
rfjv '/oqwvida '/at rd d'/qaicpvig rfjg avco rd^scog, xai aet o'vaqg
dsdrrjrog, rd varsqov idyXwasv.
Haeres. LL 28. HXiydyaav -/at ol dnofiaXXdfisvot rd '/ard
'Iwdvvqv EiayyiXiov, ovg dr/aicog 'AXdyovg '/aXiaofiat, insidfj rdv
Adynv rov Qsov anofidXXovrat, rdv did 'icodvvqv '/yqvydivra na-
rqi'/dv Qsdv Adyov, an' oiqavov '/arsXrjXvddra , xat acoryqiav
fjfilv iqyaadfisvov, rqg ndayg airov ivadq'/ov naqovaiag '/.r.X.
Haeres. LI. 33. Airov de nqocpyrsvaavrog iv yqdvoig KXav-
diov Kaiaaqog avcordrco, ors elg rfjv Hdrjiov vfjaov vnfjq^sv.
27. Jerome.
Epist. IL. ad Paulinum. (See before, p. 21.)
Comment, in Matth. Argum. (See before, p. 100.)
Catal. script, eccl. c. 9. Joannes Apostolus, quem Jesus ama
vit plurimura, fihus Zebedaei, frater Jacobi apostoh, quem He-
rodes post passionem Domini decollaverat, novissimus oraniura
scripsit Evangehura, rogatus ab Asiae episcopis, adversus Cerin
thum, aliosque haereticos, et maxime tunc Ebionitarum dogma
consurgens, qui asserunt Christum ante Mariam non fuisse. Unde
et corapulsus est divinara ejus nativitatera edicere. Sed et aliara
causara hujus scripturae ferunt: quod cum legisset Matthaei,
Marci et Lucae volumina, probaverit quidem textum historiae,
ot vera eos dixisse firraaverit; sed unius tantura anni, in quo et
passus est, post carcerem Joannis, historiam texuisse. Praeter-
misso itaque anno, cujus acta a tribus exposita fuerant, supe
rioris temporis antequam Joannes clauderetur in carcerem, gesta
narravit, sicut manifestura esse poterit his qui diligenter quatuor
Evangeliorum volumina legerint. Quae res etiam diacpiovtav, quae
videtur Joannis esse cura caeteris, tollit.

188 GOSPEL OP JOHN.
Scripsit autera et unam epistolam, cujus exordium est: "quod
fuit ab initio, quod audivimus et vidimus oculis nostris, quod
perspeximus, et raanus nostrae contrectaverunt, -de verbo vitae ; "
quae ab universis ecclesiasticis et eruditis viris probatur. Reli-
quae autera duae, quarura principiura est: "Senior electae do-
rainae et natis ejus;" et sequentis: "Senior Cajo carissimo, quem
ego dihgo in veritate," Joannis Presbyteri asseruntur, cujus et
hodie alterum sepulcrum apud Ephesum ostenditur ; etsi nonnuUi
putant duas memorias ejusdem Joannis evangelistae esse, super
qua re quum per ordinem ad Papiam auditorera ejus ventura
fuerit, disseremus. Quarto decimo igitur anno, secundam post
Neronem persecutionem movente Domitiano, in Patraos insulam
relegatus, scripsit Apocalypsim, quam interpretatur Justinus Mar
tyr et Irenaeus. Interfecto autem Domitiano, et actis ejus ob
niraiara crudelitatera a senatu rescissis, sub Nerva principe redit
Ephesum: ibique usque ad Trajanura principera perseverans, to-
tas Asiae fundavit rexitque ecclesias: et confectus senio, sexage-
simo octavo post passionem Domini anno raortuus, juxta eandem
urbem sepultus est.
Pracfatio in codd. antiq. Hoc Evangelium scripsit in Asia,
posteaquam in Patmos insula Apocalypsin scripserat . . . post
omnes Evangelium scripsit.
Adv. Jovinianum L. 26. Joannes unus ex discipulis, qui mi
nimus traditur fuisse inter apostolos, et quem fides Christi vir-
ginem repererat, virgo permansit. . . . Ut autera sciaraus, Joan
nem tunc fuisse puerum, manifestissime docent ecclesiasticae hi
storiae, quod usque ad Trajani vixerit imperium, i.e. post pas
sionem Doraini sexagesirao octavo anno dorraierit.
Comment, in Ban. c. 9. Tradentibus ecclesiasticis historiis
Joannem evangelistara usque ad tempora vixisse Trajani.

189
APPENDIX
TO TESTIMONIES TO JOHN'S GOSPEL.

THE PASCHAL CONTllOVERSY IN THE EARLY CHURCH.
Reference is usually made to the following- passages
in modern discussions regarding John's Gospel. The an
cient controversy (see the opening sentence below from
Eusebius) was as. to the propriety of the Churches in
Asia Minor closing their Fast on the 14* day of the month
at Easter. John's authority was claimed for this practice.
The modern controversy is on the question whether the
practice is reconcileable with John's Gospel which seems
to date the crucifixion of Christ on the 14*. See Intro
duction.

1. EUSEBIUS.
Eusebius, in his History of the Church (V. 22), gives a list
of the bishops who held office in the tenth year of the reign of
Comraodus. He names Victor Bishop of Eome, Demetrius of
Alexandria, Serapion of Antioch, Theophilus of Caesarea, Narcis
sus of Jerusalera, Bacchyllus of Corinth, and Polycrates of Ephe
sus. He adds that he has only recounted the naraes of the or
thodox. He goes on to say: —
Eus. H. E. V. 23. Zyryascog 8fjza '/ard rova8s oi afW/qdg
dva'/ivydsiayg, on 8fj T^g 'Aaiag dndayg al naqor/iai, cog av
ex Tra^adoffewg dq'yainriqag , aeXfjvyg zfjv reaaaqea'/ai8sr/drrjv
ipovro 8elv ini rfjg rov acoryqiov ndaxa snqrfjg naqacpvXdrrstv,
sv fj dvstv TO nqd^arov 'lovdaiotg nqoyydqsvro' dg 8 iov i'/nav-
rdg '/ard rairqv, bnnia 8' 'dv fjfiiqa T^g s^8nfid8og nsqirvyxdvot,
rdg rdv datncov iniXvaeig noieladai, oi/ s'dovg 'dvrog rovrov
sniTsXslv rdv rqdnov ralg dvd rfjv Xoinfjv dnaaav ol'/ovfisvrjv ir/-

190 APPENDIX TO TESTIMONIES TO JOHN'S GOSPEL.
'/Xqaiaig e^ annarnXi'/fjg 7raqa8daecog rd '/at elg devqo '/qarfjaav
i'rog cpvXarrnvaaig, cog fifj 8' Iriqcx nqnafj/siv naqd rfjv rfjg ava-
ardascog rov 2corr-qog fjficov fjfiiqav rdg vqarsiag iniXvsad-ai.
2vvn8nt 8fj '/at avv'/qnryasig inia/dnwv int rairdv iyivnvzn,
ndvrsg rs fiid yvcofiy dt' htiaroXdv i'/'/Xijaiaari'/nv dnyfia rolg
7iavzayoae 8iezvnoivzo, cog dv fifj 8 iv dXXy 7C0ze zfjg '/vqia-/yg
fjfiiqci rd rfjg ex vs'/qdrv dvaardaecog S7CirsXolTO rov Kvqiov fiv-
aryqinv, '/at onwg iv ravry fidvy rdv xard rn ndaxa vqazsiiov
cpvXarrdftsda rdg iniXvasig. (Diqsrai d slain vvv tiT^v xaTa
HaXaiarlvyv rqvi'/dde avy/e'/qnrqfiivcov yqacpfj, cov nqnirira'/rn
QedcpiXog T^g ev Kaiaaqeicx 7Taqnt'/iag inio'/nnog, '/at Naq'/iaang
T^g ev ' leqoaoXvfinig' '/at riov int 'Pdiiyg 8i bfinicog dXXy neqt
rov avrov tyr fjfiarog , inia'/ondv Bi'/roqa 8rjXovaa' riov rs '/ard
Hdvzov inia'/dnwv, dv HdXftag wg dqxatnrazog nqoirira'/ro, '/at
nov '/ard I'aXXiav de naqor/icov, dg Elqrjvalog insa'/n7rsi' sn re
rcov '/ard Tr}v 'Oaqnqvfjv '/at rdg i'/slas ndXeig' '/at idt'wg Ba-/-
yyXXov rfjg Koqivdicov i'/'/Xyaiag snia'/dnov, '/at nXsiarcov 'dacov
dXXwv, ol fiiav xat tijv airyv dd^av rs xat '/qiaiv i^svrjvsyfiivoi,
rfjv avrfjv ridsivrai rpfjcpov. Kat rovcwv fiiv yv bqog sig, 6 ds-
drjXwfiivog. C. 24. TiHv 8i S7cl T^g Aaiag i7cia'/onwv, rd ndXai nqdrs
qov airolg naqadoD-sv StacpvXdirsiv sdog yqfjvai 8itaxvqitofiivcov,
fp/slrn HoXv'/qdrrjg' og '/at airdg iv jj nqdg Bi'/roqa '/at rfjv
'Pcofiaiiov i'/'/Xyaiav dtsnvncoaaro yqacpfj, rfjv eig avrdv iXdovaav
naqddoaiv i'/ridsrat 8id rovrwv "'Hfislg ovv dqa8tovqyyrov dyo
fisv rfjv fjfiiqav, fir'jzs nqoandivreg, fifjze dcpatqovfievoi. Kal ydq
'/ard rfjv 'Aaiav fisydXa arotyela '/e'/oifiyrat, drtva dvaarrjaerat
rfj fjfiiqCjC T^g naqovaiag rov Kvqiov, sv fj sq'ysrat fisrd do'^ijg e^
oiqavdiv, '/at dvaaryast ndvrag rovg dyinvg, OiXi7znov rcov dw-
Ss'/a dnoardXwv, og '/s'/oifiyzai iv 'lsqa7tnXsi , '/at dvo dvyariqeg
avrov yeyqqa'/vlai naqdivoi. Kat fj sriqa airov dvydryq iv 'Ayiiii
Hvsvfiart TcoXirsvaafiivq iv 'Ecpiacit dvanavsrai' sn de '/at 'iw
dvvyg b int rd arfjdng rnv Kvqiov dvansadv, 'og iysvqdy Isqsvg
TO niraXov nscpoqsxdg, '/at fidqrvg '/at 8t8da'/aXog' ovrog iv
'Ecpiaoj '/s'/OLfiyrai.'''' [Then he enuraerates those who agreed —
Polycarp, Thraseas, Sagaris, Papirius, Melito the Eunuch — and
adds: — ] "Ovroi ndvrsg ir'qqqaav rqv fjfiiqav rfjg reaaaqea'/ai-

EUSEBIUS. 191
dexaTijg rov naaya '/ard rd eiayyiXiov,'^ fiydiv naqs'/^aivnvrsg,
aXXa ^/ard rdv '/avova rfjg niarswg d'/oXovdnvvreg. "En 8i '/dyd
o fir/qnreqog ndvzwv vfiwv HoXv/qdrrjg , '/ard naqd8oai.v nov
avyyevdv finv, oig '/at naqyxoXoidyaa naiv aircjv fnrd fiiv
yaav avyysvslg fiov iTcia'/nnnt, iyw 8e 'dy8oog' '/at ndvzors rtjv
yfiiqav 'rjyaynv ol avyysvslg fiov, ozav b Xadg yqvvs rfjv tvfiyv. ..."
Upon this Victor, Bishop of the Church of Rorae, endeavoured
to cut off the churches of all Asia from the coraraon unity, as
being heterodox. But other bishops resisted him.
Ev oig '/at b Elqrjvalog ex nqoaconov cov ijyslro '/ard rqv
FaXXiav adsXcpiov iniarsiXag, naqiazarat ftiv np dslv iv fic'tvy
TJj rfjg '/vqia'/yg fjfiiqa rd rrjg toS Kvqiov dvaO'pdaewg snirsXsl-
adai fivarrjqiov ripys fiyv Bi'/roqt 7rqnay'/dvrwg, dg fifj dno'/n-
nroi bXag i'/xXyaiag Qsnv, dq'yalov s'dovg 7caqddoaiv snirqqov-
aag, nXslara srsqa naqaivsl, '/at airolg de qrjfiaai rdds ini-
Xiycov "Ovdi ydq fidvov nsqt rfjg yfiiqag sartv fj dficpia^fjzyaig,
aXXd '/at nsqt rov s'idovg airov rfjg vqarsiag. Ol fiiv ydq o'iovzat
fiiav fjfiiqav dslv avrovg vqarsvsiv, nl di dvo, ol de xat nXsio-
vag' 01 de rsaaaqd'/ovza wqag fjfisqtvdg rs '/at vv/rsqivdg avfi-
fisrqovat t»}v fjfiiqav avrcov. Kat roiavry fiiv 7ioi'/iXia rcov e/rt-
ryqnvvrwv , ov vvv icp fjficov ysyovvla, aXXd xat nnXv nqdrsqov
int TcHv nqd fjfidv, twv yra^a to a/qi(iig, dg sl'/dg, '/qarnivzwv,
rfjv xad dnXdrqra '/at Idiwnafidv awfjdsiav sig rd fiszineiza
nsnoiyxdzcov. Kat oidiv sXazzov 7cdvzsg ovrot slqfjvsvadv rs,
xat slqyvsvofisv nqdg dXXfjXovg, xat fj dtacpcovia rqg vqarsiag tijv
bfidvotav T^g niarscog avviaryai." Tovrnig '/at laroqiav nqoa-
ridyaiv yv olxsiwg naqadyaojtat, rovrov s'yovaav rdv rqdnov
"'Ev olg '/at nl nqd 2coryqog nqsajivreqoi, ol nqnardvrsg T^g ex-
'/7.yaiag yg av vvv dcpyyfj.^ 'Avh/rjrnv Xiynfisv '/at Hiov, 'Yyivdv
rs '/at TsXsacpdqov xai Svarov, o'vzs airot iryqqaav, o'vrs rolg
fisr' aircov EnirqS7Cov, '/at oidiv sXarrov avrot fiy ryqovvrsg sl-
qfjvsvov rolg dnd twv naqor/idv, iv aig irqqelro, iqyofiivoig nqdg
airovg, /ai tol fidXXov ivavziov yv zd rqqslv rolg fiy rrjqo'vai.
Kat oidi nors 8id rd sidog rnvrn dns^Xyd-yadv Ttveg, dXX' airot
' According to the Gospel as a whole.
2 The Roman Bishops are supposed to have been: Xystus a.d. 116; Te-
lesphorus, a.d, 129; Hyginus, a.d. 138; Pius, a.d, 142; Anicetus, a.d 156; Soter,
AD. 168; Eleutherus, a.d, 173; Victor, a,d, 189; Zephyrinus, a,d, 201.

192 APPENDIX TO TESTIMONIES TO JOHN'S GOSPEL.
fifj rqqovvzeg ol nqd aov nqeapvreqoi rolg dnd rdv naqoi'/icov
ryqnvatv s'nsfncov siyaqiariav. Kat rov fia'/aqiov HoXv/dqnov
inidyfifjaavrog sv t^ 'Pcofiy inl 'Avi'/:fjzov, xal neqt dXXwv riviov
fii'/qd axdvreg nqdg aXX-yXovg eidvg elqqvevaav 7csqt roirov rov
xscpaXaiov fifj cpiXsqiar-fjaavrsg sig eavrovg. Ovrs ydq b Avi'/yrog
rdv HoXv'/aq7cnv nslaat idvvaro fifj rqqslv, drs fisrd 'iwdvvov
to'v fiadrjzov rov Kvqiov fjficov, '/at rcov Xoi7idv dnoardXwv olg
avvdiirqtipsv, dst rsrqqy'/dra, ovrs fiyv b HoXv'/aq7rog rdv 'Avi-
xrjzov sneiae rygslv, Xiyovra rfjv avvrjdsiav rcov nqd airnv nqsa-
fivriqcov ocpeiXeiv '/ariyeiv. Kat rovnov o'vrwg iydvzwv, i'/oivw-
vyaav savrolg' '/at iv rfj i'/'/Xqaicx naqexdqqaev b 'Avi'/rjzog zfjv
siyaqiariav np HoXv'/aq7no '/ar ivrqn7iyv dyXovdri, '/at fisr' sl-
qijvqg an' dXXyXcov a7iyXXdyqaav , ndaqg rfjg i'/xXyaiag slqrjvqv
iydvrwv xat rcov ryqovvrcov '/at rdv fiy rqqovvzcov."
C. 25. Irenaeus wrote letters also to other bishops on the
question. The bishops of Palestine state that they kept the
custom handed down to them by succession from the Apostles;
and that the Christians of Alexandria observed the sarae day as
they themselves did.
In another passage (IV. 26) Eusebius says that Melito Bishop
of Sardis (a.d. 175) wrote a work ou the Passover, beginning
thus: — "'Ent 2sqoviXXiov HavXov dvdvndrov T^g 'Aaiag, qr 2d-
yaqig '/aiqip Sfiaqrvqyasv , iyivsro 'tyryaig noXXfj iv Aao8i'/eicx
neqt rov ndaxa, ifinsadvrng xard xaiqdv iv i'/sivaig ralg fjfii
qaig ..." Tovtov di Xdyov fiifivqrai KXfjfiyg 6 'AXs^avdqsvg
iv Idiq) Tceqt rov ndaya Xdyct), ov dg i^ alriag rfjg rov MeXi-
Twvog yqacpfjg cpqatv kavrdv avvrd^at.
2. HIPPOLYTUS, A.D. 220.
Bef. Haer. VIII. 18. "Ersqoi di Ttveg cpiXdvsr/oi tijv cpiaiv,
Ididrat rfjv yvdaiv, fiayifiwrsqoi rdv rqdnov, awiardvovat dslv
rd ndaya rfj rsaaaqsa'/atds'/dry rov nqdrov fiqvdg cpvXdaasiv xard
rfjv rov vdfiov diazayfjv, iv jj dv yjiiqcji ifuciay, vcpoqcofisvoi rd
ysyqafiftivov iv vdfici),^ ini'/ardqarov saeadat rdv fiy cpvXd^avra
omcog dg diaaziXXerat, ov nqoasyovrsg 'on 'lovdaiotg ivofiodsrslro
rolg fiiXXovat rd dXydivdv ndaya avaiqslv, rd elg edvq /w^^ffav
3 Compare Num ix. 3, 13 ; Deut, v, 27,

THE PASCHAL CHRONICLE. 193
xat niarei voovfievov, ov yqdfifiart vvv rrjqovfievov o'i fiid zavry
nqnai'yovreg ivzoXjj oix dcpoqdaiv elg rd elqqjiivov 'vnd rov dno
ardXnv, nzi diafiaqrvqofiai navrt nsqicsfivofiivq) 'dzt dipstXizyg
iazi rov ndvra* rdv vdfiov 7coiyaai. 'Ev di rolg sriqnig ovrot
avficpcovovat 7cqdg ndvra rd rfj i'/Y.Xqaicjt vnd rcov dnoardXwv
7taqa8e8ofiiva.
3. THE PASCHAL CHRONICLE.^
'Ev avrfj ovv rfj fjfiiqcx, iv jj 'I'/fieXXov ol 'lov8aloi nqdg sani-
qav iaUisiv rd ndo'ya, saravqcodrj b Kiqiog fjfiibv /at acozfjq b
Xqiazdg, dvfia yevofievog rolg fiiXXnvat fieraX-yipeadat rfjg ni-
azewg znv /az avzdv fivazyqiov '/azd zd yeyqafifiivnv np fia'/a-
qiqi HavXij), "/at ydq rd ixaG'ya fjficov V7[iq fjficov srvdq Xqiardg,"
¦/at nvy cog Ttveg afiadiijc cpsqdfisvoi diafis^aiofjvzai ccig cpaycov rd
jfda'ya naqs8ddq' 07csq ovrs 7iaqd rcov dyiwv svayysXiwv fisfia-
dr'j/afisv o'ize rig twv fia'/aqiwv fjfilv anoardXwv ti roiovrov na-
qa8i8w'/Bv. . . . — Chron. Pasch. P. 5, B. C.
Having repeated that Christ, being slain as the true Paschal
Lamb on the 14"', could not have eaten the legal Passover be
fore He suffered, the chronicler goes on to cite testiraonies.
'InndXvrog^ roivvv 6 T^g sias^siag fidqrvg, i.nia'/onog ysyo
vdg rov '/aXovfiivov Hdqrov 7cXqainv ryg 'Piofiyg, sv np nqdg
dndaag rdg alqiasig avvrdyfiari syqaxpsv snt Xi^siog ovrwg. 'OqcH
* oXov Gal. V, 3,
6 This is a Paschal computation (ouvTayiJia iiepl ToO TCdtoxa or icaax^'^tov),
i.e. a rule for the celebration of the Passover, Such tables or calendars were not
uncommon; and we read of one made by Hippolytus for a period of 16 years.
The Festal letters of Athanasius (see before, page 13 and note 1) are instances
of the pains that were taken about such subjects. The 'Paschal chronicle' with
which we have here to do contains this tabular computation and also a Preface,—
long and mystical and of uncertain date. This Preface repeats over and over again
that Jesus Christ, being the True Passover, was slain on the day when the Jews
usually slew their passover viz. the fourteenth. The inference the author draws is
that Christ could not have eaten the legal passover before he suffered. He quotes
several early authors as testifying in his favour. From these the passages in our
text are taken, Tbe Paschal Chronicle (sometimes called Sicilian, because the MS
was found in Sicily; sometimes the Alexandrian, because it was at first supposed
to be written by Peter of Alexandria) seems to be of old date ; but its oldest MS
is of the tenth century. The Preface may be of about the seventh century. The
Preface is therefore of late date and it is also anonymous. Notwithstanding
these drawbacks, great stress has been laid upon it,
° This, though said to be from Hippolytus on Haeresies, is not found in that
work as now in existence. Its genuineness therefore rests on the authority of the
anonymous author who quotes it. 13

194 APPENDIX TO TESTIMONIES TO JOHN'S GOSPEL.
fiiv ovv on cpiXovsi'/iag rd s'qyov. Aiyet'' ydq ovrwg' inoiyae
TO ndaya b Xqiardg rdre rjj fjfiiqq '/at snadsv did xafii 8sl
IIV rqd7zov n Kvqiog inniyasv, nvrco noielv. HenXdvyzai de fiy
yivcoO'/cov on d '/aiqtp snaaysv b Xqiardg oi'/ scpaye rd '/ard
vdfiov ndaya. Ovrog ydq yv rn ndaya rd nqo'/e'/yqvyfiivnv '/at
rd reXeiovfievov rfj dqiofiivy fjfiiqcx. — P. 6, A. B.
Another short extract frora Hippolytus "neqt rov dyiov nd-
a'ya,''^ says: '0 ndXai nqosindv 'on Oi'/iri cpdyofiat rn ndaya
sl'/dnog rd fiiv dslnvov idsinvqasv nqd rnv nda'ya, rd di ndaya
oi-/ scpaysv, dXX' snadsv.^ Oidi ydq '/atqdg yv rfjg ^qwaswg
airov. The Chronicle then proceeds: —
Kat 'AnoXXivdqing (a.d. 170) di b naicorarog inio'/onog 'le-
qandXecog T^g Aaiag, b iyyvg rcov dnoaroXi'/iov yqdvcov yeyovdg,
iv Tip neqt rnv nda'ya Xdyoj rd naqanX-qata i8i8a§e, Xiycov o'v
rwg' Elat roivvv o'i 8t' dyvotav cpiXovsi'/ovat nsqt rovrwv, av/-
yvcoardv nqdyfia nsnovOdrsg' dyvoia '/dq oi '/aryyoqiav dvadi-
ysrat dXXd 8i8a'yfjg nqoa8slTat ' '/at Xiyovatv 'on rfj id' rd nqd-
/SaTOv fisrd rcov fiadqrdv scpaysv b Kvqiog, ry di fisydXy fjfiiqa
nov dtvficov avrdg s'nadev, '/at dir/yovvzat Mazdalnv ovzco Xiysiv
cog vevnfj'/aaiv 'odev aavficpwvdg ze vdfico fj vdqaig airdv, xat
araaidteiv 8o'/el '/ar' airovg rd evayyiXia.^
Kat ndXiv b airdg iv np avnp Xdyci) yiyqacpev nvrwg' 'II id'
rd dXydivdv rov Kvqiov nda'ya, fj d-vaia fj fieydXq, b dvrt rov
dfivov nalg Qeov, 6 dedetg, b 8fjaag rdv layvqdv, '/at b '/qideig
'/qiryg tdvrcov '/at vexqiov, -/at b naqadndetg elg yslqag dfiaq-
rcoXdrv, 'iva aravqwdjj, b vxpcodstg int xsqdrwv finvo/iqwrog, xat
b rfjv dy'iav nXsvqdv hi'/svrydstg, 6 ex^e'ag ex TJ;g nXevqdg airnv
rd 8vo ndXiv '/addqaid, c)8wq '/at atfia, Xdynv /at nvsvfia, xat
b racpstg iv fjfiiqcc rfj rnv ndaya, i7cizedivrng zip fivfjfian rov
Xidov. Next, Cleraent of Alexandria is cited as teaching to the sarae
effect ev np neqt rdv ndaya Xnyuj, thus: Toig fiiv ovv rcaqeXy-
Xvddaiv s'reai rd dvd fisvov nqdg 'lovdaiiov 'qad-isv soqrdtcov 6
' Xiyii sc. The Asiatic representative.
" This seems to contradict the Synoptists.
' On this and following extract see Donaldson, Christian Literature and Doc
trine, III. 245 &c.

THE PASCHAL CHRONICLE. EPIPHANIUS. 195
Kvqiog 7idaxa' inst di i'/qqv^sv airdg cov zd 7cdaya, b dfivdg
rnv Qsnv, cog nqd^arov e/ri acpayyv dydfisvog, airi'/a s8i8a^s fiiv
rovg fiad-qrdg rov rvnov rd fivarrjqiov ry ty', iv jj xat 7cvvdd-
vnvrai avrov, Hov dsXsig eroifidacofiiv am rd nda'ya cpayslv;
Taicy ovv rfj fjfiiqc} '/at b dyiaOfing rdv dtvfuov '/at fj nqnsrni-
fiaaia rf^g snqrqg iyivsro. "Odsv b Icodvvqg iv ravry rjj fjfiiqcx
sl'/drcog cog dv 7cqosTOifia'Cofiivnvg ijdq dnovixpaaOai rovg nddag
7iqdg rov Kvqiov rovg fiadrjzdg avayqdcpsi' ni7cov9sv di ry ini-
niay b Acozfjq fjfidv, airdg cov rd ndaya, '/aXXisqqdstg vnd 'Inv-
8aicov. Kat fisd' 'irsqa, 'A'/nXnidcog dqa rfj i8', 'ozs xat b'naOsv,
"(odev avrdv ol dqyieqslg '/at ol yqafifiarslg rip HiXdrqi nqoaa-
yaynvzsg ni'/ slafjXdov sig rd nqairdqinv tva fiy fuavddaiv, dXX'
d'/ioXvnog la7ciqag rd jidaya cpaydai, ravry rdv fjfisqcov rfj d-/qi-
(isiq '/cd al yqacpat 7rdaai avficpiovdvai '/al rd siayyiXia avvojdd.
Ent fiaqrvqsl de '/at y avdaraaig' rfj yovv rqiry aviarrj fjfiiqcc
r'jTig fjV 7cqwzy rcov Ip8ofid8cov to'v dsqiOfinv, Lv jj -/at rd dqayjia
vsvofindirrjrn nqoasvsy/siv rdv Isqia.
4. EPIPHANIUS.
Epiphanius (Haeresies) treating of the Quartodecimans, says,
drra^ ydq rov srovg fiiav fjfiiqav rov ndaya ol roiovrot cpiXovsi-
xcdg dynvai.
Again: xsyqyfiivoi rip qrjzip, co slnsv 6 vdfiog' on ini'/ard-
qarog og ov 7totrjast rd ndaxa. ry reaaaqea'/aide'/dcy fjfiiqa rov
firjvdg. He says there was much dispute amongst the Quartodeciraans
as to the day for the Passover; and that the Acts of Pilate were
cited as authority for the viii Kal. Apr. being the day of our
Saviour's Passion. He adds that he has seen copies of the Actff
of Pilate making the xv Kal. Apr. the date.
Again he says: edet ydq rdv Xqiardv sv rsaaaqeaxaide/drrj
fjfiiqa dveadat '/ard rdv vdfiov.
He closes with an argument in favour of the usage of the
Catholic Church, which observes also the seventh day, and says:
'/iyqrjzat ydq ni fidvov rfj reaaaqeaxatdexdry, dXXd xat ry Eli8o-
fid8i rfj '/ard nsqio8ov dva'/v'/Xovfiivy rd^et rdv rov Sajifidrov
snrd fjfisqdv. . . . 13*

196 X.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.
1. Barnabas.'
C. 7. 2. El ovv 6 l'tog TOt; Qeov, cov Kvqtog '/at fiiXXcov '/qi
vsiv tdvrag '/at vs'/qovg, snadsv, iva y nXrjyfj airov tiooicoiyay
fjfidg. . . . (Acts X. 42. See below 2 Clem. 2. 1.)
2. Clement of Rouie.
Ep. I. c. 2. 1. Hdvrsg ze iTa7ceivocpqovslrE, fiy8iv dXatovsvd-
fisvoi, vnoraaadfisvot fidXXnv 'rj vnordaaovrsg, ydtov dtdo'vreg 'fj
Xafi§dvovrsg. (Acts xx. 35.)
Ibid. c. 18. 1. Ti de s'inwfisv int rip fisfiaqrvqyjiivijj Aapi8;
nqdg ov si7csv b Qsdg' "Evqov dvdqa '/ard rfjv xaqSiav fiov,
Aapl8 rdv rov 'Isaaat, sv iXisi alwviip s'yqiaa airdv.'''' (Acts xiii.
22; ISam. xiii. 14.)
Ep. II. c. 1. 1. Kqirov tdvrwv xat vsxqdv. (Acts x. 42;
compare 2 Tira. iv. 1 and 1 Pet. iv. 5.)
3. Hermas.
Vis. IV. 2. 4. Hiarsiaag on 8l' oidsvdg dvvy awdfjvai sl
fiy 8id rov fisydXov '/at ivdd^ov dvdfiarog. (Acts iv. 12.)
4. Ignatius. '
Magnes. 5. 1. 'Enet ovv riXog rd nqdyfiara s'ysi, '/at nqd-
'/sirai rd 8vo bfiov, o rs davarog '/at fj ^tii^, '/at sxaarog elg
rdv "diov rdnov fiiXXet ^w^civ. (Acts i. 25.)
Philad. 2. 2. HoXXot ydq Xv/ot d^tdniarot ydovfj xa'/fj alx-
fiaXwritovaiv rovg deodqdfiovg. (Acts xx. 29.)
' Barnabas, Add as Echo c, 19, 8 (Acts iv. 32).
' Ignatius. Echoes: — Eph, 1, 1, comp. Acts xx. 28; Smyrn. 3. 3, comp. Acts
.., 41,

MARTYRDOM OP POLYCARP. PAPIAS. DIONYSIUS OP CORINTH. 197

5. POLTCARP. I
Philipp. 1. 2. °0v yysiqsv 6 ©eog, Xvaag rdg ddlvag rov
a8nv. (Acts ii. 24.)

6. Martyrdom of Polycarp.'
C. 7. 1. Ka'/sldsv de fj8vvazo elg 'izeqov ywqinv dneXdelv,
dXX' oi'x i^ovXfjdy, elncov Td diXyfia rov Qsov ysviadw. (Acts
xxi. 14.) 7. Papias.
Eus. H. jB. III. 39. "A^iov di ralg dnodndsiaaig rnv Hania
cpcovalg nqoadipat Xi.^sig sriqag avrov, di' cov naqddn^d nva
laroqsl xat dXXa, tug dv ex Tra^adoffewg eig aizdv iXddvza. Td
fiiv ovv '/ard rfjv 'Isqd7CoXiv OiXtnnov rdv dndaroXov dfia ralg
dvyarqdat diarqlipai, did rcov nqdaOsv dsd-qXiorat . . . '/at av
ndXiv srsqov naqddo^ov nsqt 'Idvarov rdv ini'/Xydivra Baqaa-
j5av yeyovog, dg dyXyryqtov cpdqjia'/nv ifinidvrng, '/at fiydiv dydig
did rfjv rov Kvqiov ydqiv vnofisivavrog. Tnvrnv de tov 'lovarov
fisrd TIJV rov Acorfjqog avaXyijitv rovg Isqovg anoardXnvg fisrd
Mardia aryaai rs xat insv^aadat dvrt rov nqoddrnv 'lovda int
rdv xXfjqnv T^g dvanXrjqwaswg rov airiov dqtdfiov, y rdv Hqd-
§swv cods nwg laroqsl yqacpfj' "Kat saryaav dvo, 'Iwafjcp rdv
'/aXov fisvov Baqaa^dv og inexXrjdy 'lovarog, '/at Mardiav '/at
nqoaev^dfievot elnov.'''' (Acts xxi. 8 &c.; i. 23, 24.)
8. Dionysius of Corinth.
Eus. H. E. IV. 23. AyXol 8' int rovroig, wg xat Atovvaiog
b 'Aqecnrayiryg vnd rov anoaroXov HavXov nqorqanetg int rfjv
niariv '/ard rd iv ralg Hqd^sat 8s8yXwfiiva, nqcorog rfjg sv 'Adfj-
vaig naqotxiag rfjv snia'/onfjv sy'/sysiqiaro. (Acts xvii. 34.)

' Polyc. Echo: — Phil, 8.2, comp. Acts v, 41,
• Mart, of Polyc. Echo: — c, 14. 1, comp. Acts iii, 26,

198 THE ACTS OP THE APOSTLES.

9. Justin Martyr.'
Apol. I. c. 49. p. 85 A. 'lovSalot ydq, synvrsg rdg nqocpyrsiag
'/at dst 7Tqoa8nxfjaavzsg rdv Xqiarnv, naqay svo fisvov yyvdrjaav,
oi fidvov di, dXXd '/at naqsyqijaavro' ol di and rcov id viov, fiy-
dinnrs fiydiv d'/niaavrsg nsqt rov Xqiarov, fiiyqig ov ot and
' IsqovaaXfjfi i^sXddvrsg dndaroXni aizov ififjvvaav rd nsqt avrov
'/at rdg nqocprjzsiag naqidio'/av nXyqwdivrsg y.,aqdg xat niarscog
rolg el8dXoig d7rerd^avro, xat rep dyevvrjzci) Qecp 8id rnv Xqi
arov eavrovg dvid-q'/av. (Acts xiii. 37 &c.)
Bial. c. 20. p. 237 B. 'AXXd sl -/at rd Xdyava rnv ydqrov
8ia'/qivnfiev, fiy 7cdvra ladinvrsg, nv 8id rd sivai avzd '/nivd y
d'/ddaqra nix iadiofisv, dXX' ''tj did to ni'/qd 'q davdatfia q
d'/avdddy . . . (Acts x. 14.)
Bial. c. 68. p. 293 G. Kat b Tqvcpcov JTwg ovv b Xdyog Xi
yst np Aavid 'dn and Tr^g oacpvog airnv Xfjipsrai savrip vidv o
Qsdg xat '/aroqdcoasi avrip tijv ^aaiXsiav '/at '/adiast avrdv snt
dqdvov T^g do^jjg airov. (Acts ii. 30.)
Bial. c. 1 18. p. 346 A. Kat on /qiryg tdvrcov '/at vs'/qdv
dndvriov aizdg omog b Xqiazdg, stnov sv noXXolg. (Acts x. 42.)
10. Letter to Diognetus.
C. 3. 4. 0 ydq noiqaag rdv ovqavdv xat rqv yfjv '/at navra
rd EV airolg xat ndaiv qjilv yoqqycHv cbv nqoadedfieda, ovdevdg
df airdg nqoadeotro romcov dv rolg olofievoig 8i8nvaL naqiyst
airdg. (Acts xvii. 24.)
11. Letter from the Churches of Vienne and Lyons.
Eus. H. E. V. 2. Kat vniq rdv rd dstvd dtartdivrwv yv-
> Echoes: — Apol, I, c, 40, p, 78 E, corap. Acts iv, 27; Apol, I, c, 45, p, 82
D, comp. Acts iii, 21 ; Apol, I. c. 49. p, 85 A, comp. Acts xiii, 27, 48; Apol. I.
f, 50. p. 86 n, comp. Acts i, 8, and de Resurrect, c. 9; Apol. I. c. 53. p. 88 li,
comp. Acts xvii. 26 ; Apol. II, c. 10, p. 48 D, comp. Acts xvii, 23; Dial, c. 8.
p. 225 C, comp. Acts xxvi, 29 ; Dial, c. 16. p. 234 B, comp. Acts vii. 52 ; Dial.
c. 36, p. 254 C, comp. Acts xxvii, 22, also Dial. c. 76, p, 302A; Dial, c. 39,
p. 258 A, comp. Acts xxvi, 25; Dial, c, 120, p, 349 C, comp. Acts viii. 10; Cohort.
ad Gent. u. 10. p, 11 B, comp. Acts vii. 21; ibid. c. 29. p. 28 E, comp. Acts
vii. 24,

HEGESIPPUS. ACTS OP PAUL AND THECLA. 199
yovro, /addnsq ^ricpavog b riXstng fidqrvg' "Kvqis, fifj aryayg
airolg tijv dfiaqriav ravrqv.''' Ei de V7ciq nov Xtda'tdvrwv idiero,
7cdaii) fidXXnv vniq riov ddeXcpdv; (Acts vii. 60.)
12. Hegesippus.
Eus. H. E. II. 23. Mdqrvg nvrng dXydfjg 'lovdaiotg re '/at
"EXXyai yeyivqrai, 'on 'Iqaovg b Xqiazdg ian. (Acts xx. 21.)
13. Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
(See before, pp. 1. 2,)
14. Muratorian Canon.
(See before, p, 6.)
15. Acts of Paul and Thecla.'
C. 16. '0 di dvdvnarng saryaev t^v 8idvniav aizov '/at sxd-
Xsasv rdv HavXnv Xiycov Tig si, xai ri dtdda'/sig; ni ydq fit-
'/qcog anv 'xaryyoqovaiv. Kat yqsv tjjv cpcovqv airov b HavXng
Xiycov El iyw ayfisqnv dva'/qlvofiai ri 8i8da-/w, d'/ovaov, dvdv-
nars. Qsdg tiov, Qsdg i.'/di'/yaswv, Qsdg tyXwrfjg, Qsdg dnqoa-
ds'qg, XQ'ytcov T^g tc5v dvdqdnwv acozqqiag ensfiiJJsv fie onwg and
T^g cpdoqdg '/at rfjg d'/adaqaiag dnnandaco airnvg '/at ndayg
rjdnvfjg '/at davdrov, onwg fi-q dfidqnoaiv' did snsfitpsv b Qsdg
rdv savrov nalda, ov iyco siayysXItnfiai '/at 8i8da'/io sv i'/sivqi
s'ysiv T^jv sXni8a rovg dvdqwrcovg, og fidvog awsnddyaev nXa-
vwfiivcj) '/naficp, 'iva fiyxsrt v7Tn '/qiaiv coaiv, dvd-inare, dX'Kd ni
ariv sywaiv '/at cpn§nv Qsnv '/at yvdJaiv asfivnrqrog '/at aydnrjv
aXydsiag. El ovv 'syd rd vnd , Qsov fint dvaxs'/aXvfifiiva didda-/co,
ri adi'/co ; '0 8i dvdvnarng d'/oiaag i/iXsvaev 8edfjvat rdv Hav
Xov '/at sig cpvXa'/yv dnoxaraaradyvai , fiiyqig ov eiaxoX-fjaag,
cpyatv, d'/ovaofiai airnv inifieXiareqov. (Acts xxiv. 21; xxiii. 6;
xvii. 3, 5, 30, 31.)
' "Acts of Paul and Thecla," a work of the second century, containing
accounts of Paul's labours, which Tertullian (de bapt. c. 17) says was written by
a presbyter who confessed that he manufactured it from love of Paul. According
to Jerome it dates from the beginning of the second century.

200 the acts op the apostles.
16. Irenaeus.
(See before, p. 67.)
B. III. 14. § 1. Quoniam autem is Lucas inseparabihs fuit
a Paido, et cooperarius ejus in Evangelio, ipse facit manife
stum, non glorians, sed ab ipsa productus veritate. Separatis
enim, inquit, a Paulo, et Barnaba et Joanne, qui vocabatur Mar
cus, et cum navigassent Cyprum, "nos venimus inTroadem:" et
cum vidisset Paulus per somnium virum Macedonem, dicentem;
"Veniens in Macedoniam opitulare nobis, Paule;" statim, ait:
"quaesivimus proficisci in Macedoniam, intelligentes quoniam pro-
vocavit nos Dorainus evangelizare eis. Navigantes igitur a Troade,
direxiraus navigium in Samothracen : " et deinceps reliquum omnem
ipsorum usque ad Phihppos adventum diligenter significat, ct
queraadmodura primum sermonem loquuti sunt: "Sedentes enim,"
inquit, "loquuti sumus mulieribus quae convenerant;" et quinam
crediderunt, et quam raulti. Et iterura ait: "Nos autera navi-
gavimus post dies azyraorum a Philippis, et veniraus Troadera,
ubi et commorati suraus diebus septem." Et reliqua omnia ex
ordine cum Paulo refert, omni diligentia demonstrans et loca et
civitates et quantitatem dierum, quoadusque Hierosolymam asccn-
derent: et quae illic contigerint Paulo, quemadmodum vinctus
Romam missus est, et noinen centurionis qui suscepit eum, et
parasema navium, et quemadmodum naufragium fecerunt, et in
qua hberati sunt insula, et quemadmodum humanitatera ibi per
ceperunt, Paulo curante principera ipsius insulae, et quemadmo
dum inde Puteolos navigaverunt, et inde Roraara pervenerunt,
et quanto tempore Roraae commorati sunt. Omnibus his cum
adesset Lucas, diligenter conscripsit ea, uti neque mendax, ne
que elatus deprehendi possit, eo quod orania haec constarent, et
seniorera eum esse omnibus qui nunc aliud docent, neque igno
rare veritatem. Quoniam non solum prosequutor, sed et coope
rarius fuerit apostolorum, maxirae autera Pauli, et ipse autera
Paulus manifestavit in epistoHs, dicens: "Demas me dereliquit,
et abiit Thessalonicam, Crescens in Galatiara, Titus in Dalma-
tiam: Lucas est mecum solus." Unde ostendit quod scraper jun-
ctus ei et inseparabihs fuerit ab eo. Et iterura in ea epistola
quae est ad Colossenses, ait: "Salutat vos Lucas raedicus di-

IRENAEUS. 201
lectus." Si autera Lucas quidera, qui semper cura Paulo prae-
dicavit, et dilectus ab eo est dictus, et cum eo evangehzavit, et
creditus est referre nobis Evangelium, hihil aliud ab eo didicit,
sicut ex verbis ejus ostensum est, quemadmodum hi qui num-
quara Paulo adjuncti fuerunt, gloriantur abscondita et inenarra-
bilia didicisse sacraraenta? — Quoniam autem Paulus simpliciter
quae sciebat, haec et docuit, non solum eos qui cum eo erant,
verum omnes audientes se, ipse facit manifestura. In Mileto
enira convocatis episcopis et presbyteris, qui erant ab Epheso,
et a rehquis proxirais civitatibus, quoniara ipse festinaret Hiero-
solyrais Pentecosten agere, raulta testificatus eis, et dicens quae
oportet ei Hierosolymis evenire, adjecit: "Scio quoniam jara non
videbitis faciera meara etc." . . . Deinde significans futures
raalos doctores, dixit: "Ego scio quoniam ad venient post disceS'
sum meum lupi graves ad vos, non parcentes gregi etc." . . .
Sic apostoli simpliciter, et neraini invidentes, quae didicerant ipsi
a Domino, haec omnibus tradebant. Sic igitur et Lucas neraini
invidens, ea quae ab eis didicerat, tradidit nobis, sicut ipse testi
ficatur dicens: "Quemadmodum tradiderunt nobis qui ab initio
contemplatores et rainistri fuerunt verbi."
B. III. 15. § 1. Eadem autem dicimus iterum et his, qui
Paulum apostolum non cognoscunt, quoniam aut reliquis verbis
Evangelii, quae per solura Lucam in nostram venerunt agnitio
nem, renuntiare debent, et non uti eis; aut si ilia recipiunt orania,
habent necessitatera recipere etiam eam testificationera, quae est
de Paulo, dicente ipso, priraura quidem Dominura ei de coelo lo-
cutura: "Saule, Saule, quid rae persequeris? Ego sura Jesus
Christus, quera tu persequeris:" deinde Ananiae, de eo dicente:
"Vade, quoniara vas electionis mihi est iste, ut portet nomen
meum in gentibus, et regibus, et filiis Israel. Ego enira demon-
strabo ei ex ipso, quanta oporteat eura pati propter nomen
meum." Qui igitur non recipiunt eum qui sit electus a Deo ad
hoc, ut fiducialiter portet noraen ejus, quod sit missus ad quas
praediximus gentes, electionem Domini contemnunt, et se ipsos
segregant ab apostolorura conventu. Neque enira contendere pos
sunt Paulura non esse apostolura, quando in hoc sit electus : ne
que Lucara mendacein esse possunt ostendere, veritatera nobis
cum omni diligentia annuntiantera. Fortassis enim et propter

202 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.
hoc operatus est Deus pluriraa Evangelii ostendi per Lucara, qui
bus necesse haberent oranes uti, ut sequenti testificationi ejus,
quara habet de actibus et doctrina apostolorum, omnes sequentes,
et regulam veritatis inadulteratam habentes, salvari possint. Igi
tur testificatio ejus vera, et doctrina apostolorum manifesta et
firma, et nihil subtrahens, neque alia quidera in abscondito, alia
vero in raanifesto docentiura.

17. Tatian.
Orat. c. Graec. c. 4. p. 144 B. Ayfiiovqyiav 'cfjv vn' airnv
yeyevrjfiivTjV ydqiv fjfiibv nqoo'/vvelv oi diXco. I'iyovev yXiog '/at
asXyvy dt yfidg' sira ndg rovg ifinvg vnyqirag nqna'/vvyaw; Hdrg
de ^i'Xa xat Xidovg Qsovg dnocpavnvfiai ; . . . dXX' nidi rdv
avwvdfiaarov Qsdv 8wqo8oxyTiov' 6 ydq ndvrwv dvsv8syg, oi 8ia-
^Xyriog icp' yjicov dg evdeijg. (Acts xvii. 22-25.)
18. Athenagoras.
Legatio, c. 13. '0 Tov8e rov navrdg dyfiiovqydg /at narfjq
oi delrat aifiarog, ot'de '/viaayg, oi8i T^g a^ro TtSv dvddv xai
dvfitafidrwv siw8iag, avrdg wv fj reXsia sicodia, dvev8efjg '/at
dnqoa8eyg. (Acts xvii. 25.)
Ibid. c. 16. Kat vfielg ftiv ol (iaaiXsig savrolg da'/slrs rdg
xaraywydg ^aaiXr/dg' b de '/dofing oiy cog 8eo fisvov rov Qsov
yiyovsv. (Acts xvii. 25.)
19. Clement of Alexandria.
Adumbrat. in 1. Petr. epist. Sicut Lucas quoque et Actus
Apostolorura stylo exsecutus agnosceret, et Pauli ad Hebraeos in
terpretatus epistolara.
Strom. V. 12. p. 696. Kadd '/at b Aov/dg iv ralg Hqd^sat
rdv 'A7ioardXiov dnofivqfiovsvst rdv HavXov Xiyovra' "Avdqsg
'AdyvaloL, '/ard ndvra wg 8eiai8aifioveariqovg i'fidg dewqdi. (Acts
xvii. 22, 23.)

TERTULLIAN. CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 203

20. Tertullian.
Be jejunio, c. 10. Porro cum in eodem commentario Lticae,
et tertia hora orationis deraonstretur, sub qua Spiritu Sancto
initiati pro ebriis habeantur; et sexta, qua Petrus ascendit in
superiora. Be praescript. haeret. c. 22. Et utique iraplevit (sc. Christus)
repromissum, probantibus Actis Apostolorum descensura Spiritus
Sancti. Quara scripturara qui non recipiunt, nec Spiritus Sancti
esse possunt, qui necdum Spiritura Sanctura possunt agnoscere
discentibus missum, sed nec ecclesiam se dicant defendere, qui
quando et quibus incunabulis institutum est hoc carpus, probare
non habent.
Adv. Marcion. V. 2. 3. Exinde decurrens (sc. Paulus in epist.
ad Galat.) ordinem conversionis suae, de persecutore in aposto
lura, scripturam Apostolicorum confirmat, apud quam ipsa etiam
epistolae istius materia recognoscitur, intercessisse quosdara, qui
dicerent circumcidi oportere, et observandara esse Moysi legera :
tunc apostolos de ista quaestione consultos, ex auctoritate Spi
ritus renuntiasse, non esse iraponenda onera hominibus quae pa
tres ipsi non potuissent sustinere. Quodsi et ex hoc congruunt
Paulo Apostolorum Acta, cur ea respuatis jam apparet, ut Deura
scilicet non alium praedicantia quara creatorem, nec Christum
alterius, quam creatoris, quando nec promissio Spiritus Sancti
aliunde probetur exhibita, quam de instrumento Actorum.
Be baptismo, c. 10. Adeo postea in Actis Apostolorura inve
nimus, quoniam qui Joannis baptismum habebant, non accepis-
sent Spiritum Sanctura quera ne auditu quidera noverant.
21. Clementine Homilies.
Hom. III. 53. "En fifjv e'Xeyev iyco elfii nsqt ov Mwvafjg
7TqnscpfjZSvasv elncov nqocpfjnjv iyeqel vftlv Kvqiog b Qedg fjficbv,
ex rdv d8eXcpcov vficov, waneq '/at ifii, avrov d'/nvszs '/ard ndvza.
Og dv 8i fifj a'/ovay rov 7cqncpfjzov i'/sivov, anndavelrai. (Acts
iii. 22; vii. 37. Quotation of Deut. xviii. 15.)

204 THE ACTS OP THE APOSTLES.

22. Clementine Recognitions.
I. 10. Urgebat taraen profectionem dicens, se diem festura
religionis suae, qui iraraineret, oraniraodis apud Judaeara cele-
braturura, ibique de reliquo cura suis civibus ac fratribus per-
mansurum, evidenter indicans, injuriae se horrore perculsum.
(Acts xviii. 21.)
L. 40. Nos ergo primos elegit duodecim sibi credentes, quos
Apostolos nominavit, postraodura alios septuaginta duos proba-
tissimos discipulos, ut vel hoc raodo recognita imagine Moysis
crederet multitudo, quia hic est, quem praedixit Moyses ventu
rum prophetam.
L. 60. Haec et his sirailia prosecutus siluit etiara Cananaeus.
Post quem Bamabas qui et Matthias, qui in locum Judae subro-
gatus est apostolus, monere populum coepit, ne odio haberent
Jesum neque blasphemarent eura. (Acts i. 26.)
J. 65. Garaaliel, princeps populi, adsurgens ait: Quiescite
paullisper, 0 viri Israelitae, non enim advertitis tentationem
quae imminet vobis, propter quod desinite ab hominibus istis, et
si quidem humani consilii est quod agunt, cito cessabit, si autem
a Deo est, cur sine causa peccatis nec proficitis quidquam, Dei
enira voluntatem quis potest superare? Nunc ergo, quoniam qui
dem in vesperam vergitur dies, crastino hoc ipso in loco audien-
tibus vobis, ego ipse cura istis disputabo, ut omnem errorem pa
lam arguam, dilucideque confutem. (Acts v. 38, 39.)
L. 71. Cum auteni vespera adfuisset, templum quidem sacer
dotes claudunt; nos vero ad domum Jacobi regrQssi et pernoctan-
tes ibi in oratione, ante lucem descendimus Hiericho ad quinque
millia viri. Post triduum autem venit ad nos ex fratribus qui
dam a Gamaliele, de quo supra diximus, occultos nobis nuncios
deferens, quod inimicus ille homo legationera suscepisset a Caipha
pontifice, ut omnes qui crederent in Jesum, persequerentur et
Damascum pergeret cura epistolis ejus, ut etiara inibi auxilio
usus infidehum, fidelibus inferret exitium. (Acts ix. 1, 2.)
J. 72. Simonera quendara Saraaraeum, raagum pluriraos no
strorum subvertere, adserentem sc esse quendam Stantera, hoc
est alio nomine, Christum, et virtutera suraraam excelsi Dei, qui

ORIGEN. APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS. EUSEBIUS. 205
sit supra conditorem mundi, simulque mirabilia plurima osten
dens alios dubitare, alios declinare fecerit ad se. (Acts viii. 10.)
23. Origen.
Ep. ad Afric. § 9. Tom. I. p. 22. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 69.)
Kat iv ralg Hqd^eat de twv dnoardXwv 6 ^ricpavog fiaqrvqcov
int noXXolg, '/at ravra Xiyet' Tiva rdv nqocpyrdv ov/ i8ico^av
CH nariqeg vfidv, xat ani'/reivav rnvg nqn'/azayyeiXavzag neqt
rfjg iXevascog rov 8ixaiov, ov v'vv vfislg 7tqo8drat xai cpovslg iyi-
vsads ; 'AXydsisiv fiiv ydq rdv ^ricpavov ndg barigcfvv twv nqoais-
fiivwv 'tdg Hqd^sig rdv d7ioardXcov bfioXoyqast. (Acts vii. 52.)
Eus. H. E. VI. 25. (See before, p. 9.)
C. Cels. VI. 11. Tom. I. p. 638. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 1308.) Kat
'lovdag de o laXiXalog, wg 6 ^ouxag ev Tatg Hqd^saiv rdv d7co-
ardXcov syqaxpsv, i^ovXydq samdv nva slnslv fiiyav, '/at 7iqd
S'/sivov Qsvddg.
Hexapl. Ln Psalm. IL v. 8. (Tom. H. 537.) Migne VL p. 575.
Avatv Evrvyovrsg 'E^qai/olg dvnyqdcpoig, iv ftiv np sriqcij sv-
qofisv aqyfjv dsvriqov xpaXfiov ravra' sv 8i np sriqij) avvfjnro
np nqdrcij. Kat iv ralg Hqd^sai de twv dnoardXcov rd Yldg
fiov sl av, iyw afjfisqov yeyivvq'/d ae, iXiyero slvai rov
nqdzov ipaXfiov. 'iig ydq yiyqanrai, cpqatv, sv nqdrqj xpaXfup
Yldg fiov ei av. Td eXXyvr/d de dvriyqacpa 8evTeqov elvai rov
rov fiyvvei. 'Ev fiivrot np 'E^qai/ip oi8evt twv ipaXfiiov dqtdfidg
naqdxEirat, nqdrog sl rvyot rj ^ rj y .
24. Apostolical Constitutions.
LI. 6. "Sig nov Xiyst 6 Aovxdg' ^iiv yq^aro b 'lyaovg noislv
'/at 8i8da'/Eiv.^ (Acts i. 1.)
25. Eusebius.
H. E. II. 17. Toiyaqovv xav Taig bfioXoyovfiivaig rdv d7tn-
ardXwv Hqd^saiv ificpiqsrat, 'on dfj ndvrsg ol rdv anoardXwv
• Another reading is: Kal -^ap 6 Kupio; ijjjiu'j xal SiSaaxaXoj 'Ir^aiZi Xpi-
OTo? i^p^aro npuTOV notsiv xa\ tote SiSaoxsiv.

206 THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.
yvdqifioi, rd '/ryfiara '/at rag vndq^sig 8ianinqda'/nvzsg, ifiiqitnv
dnaat '/ad' n dv zig yqsiav slysv, cog fry de sivai nva Ev8sfj naq
airnlg' "Oani ynvv '/zyzoqsg 'ywqlcov 'fj oh/idv vnfjq'yov, dg b Xd
yog cpyat, nwXovvzsg scpsqov rdg rifidg rdv 7C in qaa/o fiivwv, sri-
d-sadv rs naqd rnvg nd8ag Tttiv airoffTo^wv, wars 8ia8i8oadai
l/darcij '/ad' n dv rig "yqsiav srysv.
Ihid. III. 4. "Ozi fiiv ovv rolg i^ idvdv xqqiaacov 6 HaiJXog,
rovg dnd 'IsqovaaXfjfi '/at '/v'/Xiii fiiyqi roi) 'iXXvqt'/nv rdv s'/'/Xij-
aicov '/ara(ii§XyTat dsfisXiovg, dfjXov ex rdv airov yivotr' dv
cpcovdv, '/al dcp' dv b Aov/dg iv ralg Hqd^saiv lardqyasv.
Ibid. Aovxdg 8i . . . iv 8vatv fjfilv vno8siyfiaza dsnnvsv-
azoig '/azaXiXoine ^tfiXioig ' zip 8s EvayysXic^, . . . '/at zalg zdv
dnoardXcov Ilqd^saiv, ag ni-/iri 8i' d'/nfjg, dcpdaXfiolg 8i avroig
naqaXa^dv, avvsrd^aro.
Ibid. III. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
26. Jerome.
Be Vir. Illustr. c. 7. See before under Luke, where also see
other references. [Note. The Acts of the Apostles has been, as the foregoing testimonies
show, an accepted book from the earliest times. The Manicheans (see be
low) objected to it because of its account of the coming of the Holy Ghost.
The Marcionites (see above, under Tertullian) could not accept it because of
its testimony to the God of the Creation being the Father of Christ Jesus.
The Ebionites (Epiph. Haer. 30, 16) rejected it because of its recording the
admission of Gentiles into the church without circumcision ; the Severians
(Eus, H. E, IV. 29) would not have Paul's Epistles or the Acts of the
Apostles because these books were in conflict with their ascetic principles,
Chrysostom iu his Homilies on Acts (Hom. 1) says rToXXois toutI to ptpXtov
o\j8' OTt til, YMwp'|Ji-o'v £oTiv, OUTE auTO , oute o' Ypai)ja? auTO xal (;uv3e(?,
but he is pointing at the popular neglect of the book, not at any deliberate
rejection. Photius : Quaest Amphiloch. 145 says tov 8£ auyvpsyEa Tuv
llpdlewv ol jXEv KXiQUEVTa X^youat tov 'Pai(XiQ?, aXXoi 8k Bapva^av, y.a\ Aou-
xav TOV EuaYyeXtaTifiv, But this statement as to doubt of the authorship is
not supported by the testimonies of early writers.

207 XI.
THE EPISTLES.
(compare sections i-iii.)
Eusebius.
//, E. 111. 3.
Hsqt TCiiv iniarnXuiv twv dnoardXcov.
Hirqov fiiv ovv sniarnXfj fiia fj Xsynfiivq avrov nqnriqa dvco-
fioXdyrjzai ¦ ravry di '/at nl ndXai nqsa^vzsqni tig dvaficpiXi'/rqi
iv rolg acpdv avrdv '/araxiyqijvrai avyyqdfifiaai. Tfjv di cpsqn-
fiivqv avrnv 8svriqav, oi'/ iv8iddy'/ov fiiv sivat naqsiXycpafiev.
Oficog 8e nnXXolg 'yqijaifiog cpavslaa, fisrd nov dXXcov ianov8dad-q
yqacpcov. .To ys fifjv rafv inr/S'/Xyfiivcov airnv Hqd^swv, '/at rn
'/ar avrnv wvofiaofiivov EiayyiXiov, rd rs Xsydfisvov avzov Ky-
qvyfia, '/at rfjv xaXnvfiivyv 'Ano'/dXvxpiv, aid' 'dXiog sv '/aO-nXr/olg
I'afiev naqa8s8nfiiva , oti fffj rs dq'yaiwv ftfj rs Ttiiv '/ad' fjfidg
rig i'/'/Xyaiaari'/dg avyyqacpsvg ralg i^ avzwv awsyqijaazo fiaq
rvqiaig.'^ Hqniovarjg de T^g laroqiag, nqo'vqyov noiyadfiat avv
ralg diadoyalg vnoaqffTjvaaHai, rivsg rdv '/ard yqdvovg i/xXq-
aiaari'/iov avyyqacpiwv b7toiaig '/i'yqyvrai riov dvnXsyofiivcov, riva
rs nsqt rcov ivdiadfj/wv '/at bfioXoyov fiivwv yqacpdv, xal baa nsqt
rcov fifj roiovrcov aizolg e'iqqrat. 'AXXd rd fiiv dvoiiatdfisva Hi
rqov, cov fidvqv fiiav yvqaiav e'yvwv iniaroXyv '/at naqd rolg 7id-
Xai nqsapvriqnig bftnXoynvfiivqv, roaavra. Tov de HavXov nqd-
' Eusebius speaks too strongly here, Clem, Alex, in his Hypotyposes gave
a brief account of the " Apocalypse of Peter " among other Antilegomeua (see Eus,
H, E, VI, 14). In his Stromata he frequently quotes the "Preaching of Peter"
(see Strom, 1, 29. 182, p. 427), &c. ; and Origen (on John, Tom, XIII, c, 17.
p, 226) refers to it as quoted by Heracleon, and speaks of the time which might
be occupied by a controversy on its genuineness. Hilgenfeld (Nov. Test, Extra
Can.'Rec. IV, p. 66) goes too far in saying Origen "decernere noluit" TCEpl toO
PijiXiOD, TCo'TEpo'v TtOTE yfiiai.a'i oSJtiv tJ vdSov -^ jxixtov, for Origen merely puts
the enquiry aside because of the time it would consume. What Origen thus says
is consistent with his explicit statement (icepl ap)^uv Prolog, p. 49) that the
"Preaching of Peter" was neither written by Peter nor by any other inspired
man, Clement's quotations are overlooked in Eusebius's statement in the text.
There is an obscure reference to what Peter and Paul taught the Corinthians
and the Eomans in words ascribed to Dionysius of Corinth in Eus. H, E. II. 25,

208 THE EPISTLES.
djj^ot '/at aacpelg al 8e'/aTiaaaqeg. "On ye fifjv Ttveg ydsry/aai
rfjv nqdg 'E§qaiovg , 7cqdg T^g 'Pwfiaiwv ix'/Xyaiag cog fiq Hav
Xnv ovaav airfjv dvriXiysadat cpyaavzsg, ov 8i'/atov ayvosiv. Kat
rd nsqt Tavrrjg de TOig nqd fjfidv slqrjfiiva -/ard '/aiqdv na-
qadyaofiat. Oidi fiqv rdg Xsyofiivag avrov Hqd^eig sv avaji-
cpiXi'/rotg 7caqeLXrjcpa. 'Enet de 6 airdg andaroXog, iv ralg sni
riXst 7cqoaq'yaeat rijg nqdg 'Pwfiainvg, fivfjfiyv nenoirjzai fieTa riHv
dXXwv xat 'Eqfid, ov cpaatv vndqystv rd rov Hoifiivog §i^Xiov,
laziov tSg '/at rovro nqdg fiiv tivwv avTi^e'^exTai, dt oi'g ovx av
sv bfioXoyovfiivoig rsdsiq, vcp' sriqiov di dvay/atdrarov olg fia-
Xiara dsl aroixsiioaswg slaaywyr/yg, -/i'/qirat. "Odsv ydy xai ev
E'/'/Xyaiaig "afisv aird 8s8rjfioaisvfiivov, -/at rdv naXaiozanov de
avyyqacpiwv '/syqyfiivovg nvdg ainp '/arsiXycpa. Tama sig na-
qdaraaiv rdv rs dvavn^qyrwv xai twv ^iij naqd ndatv OfioXo-
yovfiiviov dsiwv yqafifidrwv slqrjadw.

209
XII.
THE EPISTLES OF PAUL.^
{compare sections i-iii.)
1. Clement of Rome.^
Ep. I. c. V. 4. ... Hirqov, og 8id tyXov d8ixov oiy sva oi8i
8vo, aXXd nXsiovag vnfjvsy/ev ndvovg, '/at ovrco fiaqrvqyaag enoq-
evdy elg rdv dcpeiXdfievov rdnov rfjg dd^yg. Aid tyXnv '/at s'qiv
HavXog v7T0finvyg ^qa^elnv s'8st^ev, snrd'/ig deff^tta cpoqiaag, cpvy-
adsvdstg, Xidaadstg, '/'qqv^ ysvdfisvog s'v rs rfj dvaroXy '/at iv
rfj 8 vast, rd yswalov rfjg niarswg airov '/Xiog sXafisv, dt'/aio-
avvyv 8i8a^ag oXov rdv xdofiov, '/at snt to riqfia T^g di;ffewg
iXdwv, xat fiaqrvqyaag snt rdv fjynvfiivwv, owwg dnqXXdyy rov
'/da fiov xat sig rdv dyiov rdnov inoqsvdy, vnofiovyg yevofievog
fiiyiarog vnoyqafifidg.^
* Paul's Epistles are supposed by many to have been originally more nu
merous than they now are : and some have sought to show what specific Epistles
were lost. An Epistle to the Laodiceans (Col. iv. 16) (see Muratorian Canon be
fore, p, 7) has been supplied by tradition, but is obviously spurious (see Light
foot's ' Colossians,' p, 353), An Epistle to the Corinthians is supposed to have been
lost; some say there are two lost (see 1 Cor, ill. 9, and for tiie spurious Epistles
of the Corinthians to St Paul and of St Paul to the Corinthians, as translated by
Lord Byron from the Armenian, see Stanley's ' Corinthians,' p, 609), There is also
supposed to have been another to the Philippians now lost (Phil, iv. 16; iii, 1,
18 — compare Polycarp, § 3), Certain letters of Paul and Seneca have been manu
factured (see Lightfoot's 'Philippians,' p, 268, &c,). Although Basilides is said to
have been the first to reject the Pastoral Epistles and Hebrews, it appears that
Marcion, who was first to make a formal collection of the letters of Paul, was
the first to reject these four Epistles formally. He also called Ephesians by the
name of Laodiceans, Baur divided the Pauline Epistles into three classes, the first
(or Homologoumena) containing only Galatians and 2 Corinthians and Romans ;
the second (Antilegomeua) containing Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, Phile
mon, and Thessalonians, The Pastoral Epistles he regarded as the third (or
spurious) class. The phraseology of this division is from Eusebius ; Baur attempts
to show that its substance corresponds with Marcion's division. Hebrews Baur
does not reckon among Paul's Epistles at all,
> See a discussion of questions regarding this and several following sections
in ' Introduction to Pauline Epistles,' by Paton J, Gloag, D.D. Edin, 1874.
* This passage has been the occasion of infinite debate. It seems to confirm
the tradition of Paul's missionary journeys after his first imprisonment, and thus
leaves time for his writing the Pastoral Epistles, The Muratorian fragment speaks
of Paul's journey to Spain (see p. 6), and the T£p(iaT-os SuoEu; in Clement may
refer to Spain, Those who refuse to admit this make the "extreme west" to be
14

210 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL.

2. Tatian.
Eus. H. E. IV. 29. Tov 8s anoaroXov cpaat roXfiyaai rtvag
airdv fisraipqdaat cpwvdg, tSg sniSioqdovfisvov airdv T'fjv rrjg
cpqdaswg avvra^iv.
3. Caius.
Eus. H E. VI. 20. ^HXds 8' sig fjfidg '/at Fa'tov Xoytord-
Tov dv8qdg didXoyog, snt 'Pwfiyg '/ard Zsipvqlvov nqdg Hqd'/Xov
rfjg xard 0qiyag alqiaswg vnsqfiayovvra '/s'/ivy fiivog , sv cp Tttiv
8i' ivavriag rfjv nsqt rd awrdrreiv xaivag yqacpdg nqonirsidv
TS '/at rdXfiav sniarofiitwv twv toij Isqov anoaroXov dsxarqiwv
fidvwv sniaroXwv fivyfiovsvst , rfp' nqdg 'Efiqaiovg fifj awaqidfi-fj-
aag ralg Xotnaig' inst xat sig devqo naqd 'Ptofiaiiov naiv oi
vofiitsrat rov dnoardXov rvyydvsiv.
Jerome, Be Vir. III. c. 59. Caius sub Zephyrino Romanae ur
bis episcopo, i. e. sub Antonio, Severi filio, disputationem ad
versus Proculura, Montani sectatorera, valde insignem habuit, ar-
guens eum temeritatis, super nova prophetia defendenda: et in
eodem volumine epistolas quoque Pauli tredecim tantura enurae-
rans deciraara quartara, quae fertur ad Hebraeos, dicit non ejus
esse : sed et apud Romanos usque hodie quasi Pauli apostoli non
habetur.
4. Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
(See before, pp, 1, 2.)
an expression denoting Rome itself. Another main point of controversy is the
connection between "reaching the extreme west" and "bearing testimony before.
rulers " Some make the two clauses synchronous, so as to read that Paul's
martyrdom took place in the '; extreme west," wherever it was. Others regard
the three clauses depending on StSaEa;, &5uv, and napTuprjaa; respectively, as
making three distinct and independent statements. The punctuation varies ac
cordingly. Lightfoot prints ^XtMv, while Bryennios, Hilgenfeld, and Gebhardt
and Harnack have not even a comma after the word. The punctuation in our
text seems to be the most natural. On the controversy as regards the second
imprisonment, see the two sides well represented in Meyer's Commentary — one
by Meyer himself, Einl. in den Brief an die Rom, § 1, p. 12; and the other by
Huther, Einl. in die Pastoralbriefe, § 3. p. 25 (Ed. 1859). See also the com
mentaries of the editors named above.

origen. eusebius. 211
5. Muratorian Canon.
(See before, p. 7.)
6. Origen.
C. Cels. IIL 20. (Opp. 1. 1, p. 458.) Kai q>afisv rolg bfio-
voovai rip KiXacp, on aids fiiav dqa cpavratdfisvog aocpiav b Hav
Xog vnsqiyovaav, snyyyiXXsro aocpiav XaXslv iv rolg rsXsioig'
Ensi8dv 8e '/ard rd savrov dqaav cpfjay, on oidiv sywv aocpdv
ravra inyyyiXXero' dvranoxqtvovfisda airip, Xiyovrsg' Hqcornv
aacp'rjviaov rov ravra Xiyovrog rdg iniaroXdg' '/at dvarsviaag np
§ovXyfiart h/daryg iv airalg Xi^siog {cpsq' einelv rfj nqdg 'Ecpe-
aiovg, '/at nqdg KoXaaaasig, xat rfj nqdg QsaaaXovrxstg , '/at
OiXinnqaiovg, '/at nqdg 'Pwfiaiovg), aficpdrsqa dsicov, '/at on
vBvdyxag rovg HavXov Xdyovg, '/at on naqaarfjaat svydstg nvdg
'y 'yXidiovg. 'Edv ydq E7Ci8ip savrdv rfj fisrd rov nqoaiysiv dva-
yvdaei, ev oi8 on 'fj davfidasrai rdv vovv rov avdqdg, iv Idiw-
TL'/jj Xi^SL fieydXa neqtvnovvtog, 'fj fifj davfidaag, airdg '/xtrayiX-
aarog cpavelrat' e'ire diyyovfievog tSg vevoyxdg rd ^ovXyfia rnv
dvdqdg, rj xat dvziXiyetv '/at avarqineiv nsiqwfisvog a scpavrdadrj
airdv vsvoy/svat. 7. Eusebius.
H. E. III. 3. (See before, p. 207.)
Ibid. II. 22. Tovtov ds (Dfjarog vnd Niqwvog didSoyng jtsfin-
srat, '/ad' ov 8i'/aioXoyrjadfievog b HavXog 8Eafitog int 'Pdfirjg
dysrai. 'Aqiaraqyog avnp avvfjv, ov xat ei'/orwg awaryfiaXcozdv
nov Ttiiv sntarnXcov dno'/aXsl. Kat Aovxdg 6 xat rdg Hqd^sig
Tttiv dnoardXwv yqacpfj naqadovg, iv rovroig xariXvas tijv laroq-
iav, 8LSTiav 'dXyv snt ryg 'Pdjiyg rdv HavXov dvsrov diarqlipai,
¦/at rdv rov Qsov Xdyov dxwXvnog '/yqv^at sniaqfiyvdfisvog. Tore
fiiv ovv dnoXoyy ad fisvov avdig int rfjv rov '/yqiyfiarog dia'/oviav
Xdyog I'ysL arsiXaadai rdv dndaroXov, devreqov 8 snt^dvra rfj
airfj ndXst np xaT' airdv rsXsiwdfjvat fiaqrvqicji. 'Ev qj 8eafiolg
sydfievog tjjv nqdg Tifidd-eov devriqav e7CiaroXyv avvrdrrei, 'dfiov
aqfiaivwv r-yv re nqoriqav ainp yevofiivrjv anoXnyiav xai tjjv
7taqanddag reXeiioaiv. Asyov dfj xat rovrwv rdg avrov fiaq
Tvqiag ' 14*

212 THE epistles of PAUL.
"'Ev TIJ TCqCOT'Tj ^OV,"
cpyatv, " uTtoXoyta o-vSiig fioi evintagEyivsTO, dXXa Ttavrsg fis syKarekncov
(ftjj tt-VTolg Xoyi69eiri), o Ss Kvqiog (iov Tiaqsery xal svsSvvajiaGs fii,
'iva di ifio-a ro K'qQvyjxa jtlyqocpoqy-d-fj, xal axovOcoOi Ttavxct ra 'id-vy,
Kol s^Q'iad-yv ix GtofiuTog Isovrog. "
Sacpdg de naqiaryat 8td rovrwv, 'on 8y to nqdrsqov, cog dv rd
'/yqvy fia rd 8t' airov nXyqwdsiy, i^qvady ex ardjiarog Xiovrog,
rdv Niqwva ravry dg eoi'/e did rd wfiddvfiov nqoaeinwv. O'v/
ovv E^fjg nqoaridst'/e naqanX-fjaidv rt, rip,
"'PvGixal [IS ix axofiarog Xiovrog."
'Edqa ydq np nvsvfiart r-yv oaov ovnco fiiXXovaav airov tsXsvt'tjv.
Aid cpyatv intXiywv rip,
"xal i^q-va&tjv ix GtofiaTog Xiovrog, ^^ rd,
"'PvasTai fis 0 K-VQiog ciTto TtavTOj 'sqyov TiovyqaiJ, xal GcoGsi sig ryv
^aSiXsiav avrov ryv inovquviov,
arjfiaivwv rd naqavrixa fiaqrvqiov, o '/at aacpiarsqov sv rfj airfj
nqoXiyet yqacpfj cpdaxwv
" Eyco yaq y8y a-nivSofiai, xal o xaiqog ryg ififjg avaXriasag icpistyxsv."
Nvv fiiv ovv snt T^g dsvriqag sniaroXyg rdv nqdg Tifiodsov, rdv
Aovxdv fidvov yqdcpovn avrip awslvat dqXol, '/ard di rfjv nqo
riqav dnoXoyiav oidi rnvrov. "Odsv sl'/drwg rdg rdv dnoard
Xwv Hqd^stg in i'/sivov 6 Aov/dg nsqtiyqarpe rdv yqdvov, t^v
fiiyqig ore np HavXcp avvfjv laroqiav vcpyyyadfisvog. Tavra di
fjfiiv etqyrat naqiarafiivoig, ort fifj '/ad' yv b Aov/dg dviyqaxpsv
snt rfjg 'Pcofiyg inidyfiiav roi HaiXov rd fiaqriqiov ainp avv-
snsqdvdy. Elxdg ys rot xard fiiv aqydg ynidrsqov rov Nsqcovog
dtaxsifiivov qdov t^v vniq rov ddy ftarog rov HaiXov '/aradeydfj-
vat dnoXoy'tav. HqoeXddvrog de elg ddefiirovg rdXfiag, fierd rdv
dXXwv xat rd xard riov dnoardXwv sntxstqqdyvat.
Ihid. II. 25. HavXog 8y ovv en' airyg 'Pdfiyg t^v '/ecpaXfjv
dnoTfiydyvai, '/at Hirqog waavrwg dvaa'/oXoniadyvat xar' airdv
laroqovvrat. Kat niarovrai ys T'fjv laroqiav, fj Hirqov '/at Hav
Xov elg devqo '/qaryaaaa ent rdv airddi xoifiyryqiwv nqdaqyaig.
oidiv 8' yrrov '/at ix'/Xyaiaanxdg dvfjq, Fd'iog dvdfian, '/ard

eusebius. JEROME. 213
Zscpvqlvov 'Pwfiaicov ysyovdg iniaxonov ' og 8fj Hqd'/Xci) rfjg
'/ara Oqvyag nqoiarafiivij) yvdfiyg iyyqdcpiog diaXsydstg, aird dy
ravra nsqt twv rnncov svda rdv slqyfisvwv dnnarnXcov rd Isqd
O'/yvdfiara '/araridsLTat, cpyaiv
" Eyco &s xa xqonata xcov ajioaxoXmv 's'jf^ca dsl^ai. 'Edv ydq td-sX-qGyg
a-nsk&slv ijil xov Baxixavov , y ijii xijv odov xfjv SlGxiav, s-vQyGttg
ra xQonaia xav xavzyv iSqvGafiivcov X'qv ixxXyalav."
'Qg de '/ard rdv airdv dficpw '/aiqdv sfiaqriqyaav, Koqivdiwv
snia'/nnog Aiovvatog iyyqdcpcog 'Pwfiaioig bfitXwv wds nwg naq-
iaryatv '
" Taijxa xal vjxsig 6ia xqg xoGavtyg vov&sGlag xyv d^to Jlixgov
xcii TIavXov cpvrslav ysvy&slGav Pcofiaicov xs xal KoqivQ-icov Gvvixtqd-
Gaxs. Kal yaq afiipco xnl sig xyv yfisxsqav Koqiv&ov cpvxsvGavxsg
yfiag ofioicag i8iSa^av ofiolmg 8s xott sig tijv 'IxaXiav Ofioos diSd^-
avxsg, ifiaQxvQrjGav xaxa xov a-vxov xaiqov."

8. Jerome.
Be Vir. III. c. 5. Quia in Actibus Apostolorura plenissirae
de ejus conversatione scriptum est, hoc tantum dicara, quod
post passionera Doraini vicesimo quinto anno, i. e. secundo Ne
ronis, eo tempore quo Festus procurator Judaeae successit Fe
lici, Roraara vinctus mittitur, et biennium in libera raanens cu
stodia, adversus Judaeos de adventu Christi quotidie disputavit.
Sciendura autera in prima satisfactione, necdum Neronis imperio
roborato, nec in tanta erumpente scelera, quanta de eo narrant
historiae, Paulum a Nerone diraissum, ut Evangelium Christi in
Occidentis quoque partibus praedicaretur, sicut ipse scribit in
secunda epistola ad Timotheum, eo tempore quo et passus est,
de vinculis dictans epistolam: "In prima raea satisfactione nerao
mihi affuit, sed omnes me dereliquerunt : non eis imputetur. Do
minus autem raihi affuit, et confortavit rae, ut per rae praedi
catio corapleretur, et audirent oranes gentes: et liberatus sum
de ore leonis." Manifestissime leonera propter crudelitatera Ne-
ronera significans. Et in sequentibus: "Liberatus sum de ore
leonis. " Et statim : " Liberabit me Dorainus ab omni opere malo,
et salvabit me in regnum suum coeleste," quod scilicet praesens

214 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL.
sibi sentiret iraminere martyrium. Nam et in eadera Epistola
praemiserat: "Ego enim jara immolor, et tempus resolutionis
meae instat." Hic ergo quarto decimo Neronis anno, eodem die
quo Petrus Romae, pro Christo capite truncatur, sepultusque est
in Via Ostiensi, anno post passionera Domini tricesimo septimo.
Scripsit autem novem ad septem Ecclesias Epistolas: ad Roma
nos unara; ad Corinthios duas; ad Galatas unam; ad Ephesios
unam; ad Phihppenses unam; ad Colossenses unam; ad Thessa
lonicenses duas; praeterea ad discipulos suos, Timotheo duas,
Tito unara, Phileraoni unara. Epistola autem quae fertur ad He
braeos, non ejus creditur, propter styli serraonisque dissonan-
tiam; sed vel Barnabae, juxta Tertulhanura; vel Lucae evange
listae, juxta quosdam; vel dementis Romanae postea Ecclesiae
episcopi, quem aiunt ipsi adjunctum sententias Pauli proprio or
dinasse et ornasse sermone. Vel certe quia Paulus scribebat ad
Hebraeos, et propter invidiam sui apud eos nominis, titulum in
principio salutationis amputaverit. Scripserat ut Hebraeus He
braico, id est, suo eloquio disertissime, ut ea quae eloquenter
scripta fuerant in Hebraeo, eloquentius verterentur in Graecum:
et hanc causara esse, quod a ceteris Pauli Epistolis discrepare
videatur. Legunt quidam et ad Laodicenses, sed sub oranibus
exploditur.

215
xm.
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
1. Barnabas.
C. 4. 12. '0 '/vqtog dnqoawnoXfjfinrwg /qtvsl rdv /dofiov.
"E/aarog xadwg snoiqasv xofuslrat. (Rora. ii. 11 ; see Gal. ii. 6
and 1 Pet. i. 17.)
C. 13. 7. Ti ovv Xiyet rip 'Afiqadfi, ore fidvog niarevaag
srid-y elg di/atoaivyv ; 'l8ov rideixd ae, 'A^qadfi, nariqa id
vdv TWV niarsvdvrwv 8i' d/qo^variag np Qsqi. (Rora. iv. 11;
comp. Gen xvii. 5.) 2. Clement op Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 32. 1. 0 av Tig xad-' 'sv sxaarnv slXr/qivdg '/aravnyay, E7vt-
yvdasrat fisyaXsla rdv in' airov 8e8ofiivwv 8wqeii)v. 'E§ airov
ydq Isqslg re xat Aevlrai ndvreg ol Xetrovqyovvreg rip dvataazy-
qicj) rov Qsov' e§ avrov b Kvqiog 'lyaovg rd '/azd adq'/a. (Rora.
ix. 4.) C. 35. 5. Ano^qiipavreg acp' savrdv ndaav d8i'/iav xat dvofi-
iav, nXsovs^iav, s'qsig, '/ccxoyd^siag rs '/at 8dXovg, iptdvqtajiovg
rs xat 'xaraXaXtdg, dsoarvyiav, vnsqycpaviav rs '/at dXatovsiav,
•/evodo^iav re '/at acpiXo^eviav. Tavra ydq ol nqdaaovreg arvy-
yrot rep Qecp vnaqyovatv oi fidvov de ol nqdaaovreg aird,
dXXd '/at ol avvsv8o'/ovvTeg airolg.'^ (Rora. i. 29 &c. Corap.
2 Cor. xii. 20.)
C. 38. 2. 'O layvqdg ryfieXsirw rdv dadevfj, b 8e dadsvfjg
svrqsnirw rdv laxvqdv. (Rora. xiv. 1.)
C. 46. 7. 'Ivari dtiX'/ofiev '/at 8iaand)fiev rd fieXy rov Xqiarov
' In addition to the following extracts, compare as echoes more or less dis
tinct: C. 5. 4, ?iiiXov xal Spii (Rom. xiii, 13; 2 Cor. xii. 20; Gal, v, 20), C. 16. 2.
aXa^ovEfa; xal UKspTj^avCas (Rom. i. 30 ; 2 Tim. iii. 2),
' This is perhaps rather an echo than a quotation.

216 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
xat araatdtofiev nqdg rd aw fia rd t'dtov, xai eig roaavryv ano-
voiav iqxdfieda ware intXadiadat fjfidg on fisXy iafiiv aX-
XijXcov. (Rora. xii. 5.) Second Epistle.
C. 1, 8.* 'ExdXeasv ydq fjfidg oi'/ 'dvrag xat fjdiXyasv ex fifj
'dvrog sivat fjfidg. (Rora. iv. 17; comp. 1 Cor. i. 29.)
3. Ignatius. ^
Ad Ephes. c. 18. 'E/ aniqfiarog fiiv Aa§td, nvsvfiarog ds
dyiov. (Rom. i. 3, 4.)
Ad Ephes. c. 20. 'Ev 'lyaov Xqianp, rip '/ard adqxa ex ye'v-
oi'g Aa^l8, rip vlip avdqdnov xat vlip Qsov. (Rom. i. 4.)
Ad Philadelph. c. 11. Kayw np Qscp svxaqtardr vniq vfidv,
'on ede^affi^e airovg, dg xat vfidg 6 Kvqiog. (Rora. xv. 7.)
Ad Smyrn. c. 1. 'AXyddg 'dvra ex yivovg Aa^td '/ard adq'/a,
vldv Qsov '/ard diXyfia xat divajiiv Qsov. (Rom. i. 3, 4.)
4. Polycarp. ^
Ad Philippens. c. 3. 3. Hqoayovayg T^g dydnyg, T^g eig Qsdv
xat Xqtardv '/at sig rdv nXyaiov. 'Edv ydq Ttg roircov svrdg y,
nsnXyqwxsv svroXfjv dt'/atoaivyg' b ydq s'ywv dydnyv fia'/qdv
iart ndayg dfiaqriag. (Rora. xiii. 9, 10.)
C. 6. 1. 'AXXd nqovoovvrsg det rov xaXov evwntov Qeov '/at
dvdqdnwv, dnexdfievot ndayg oqyfjg, '/.r.X. (Rora. xii. 17 ; 2 Cor.
viii. 21.)
C. 6. 2. 'AnivavTL ydq rdv rov Kvqiov xat Qeov safiiv ocp-
daXfidv, '/at ndvrag del naqaarfjvai np ^fjfiart rov Xqtarov xat
'd'/aarov vniq samov Xdyov 8ovvai. (Rora. xiv. 10, 12; comp.
2Cor. V. 10.)^
• Clement. Compare as echoes: C. 3, 1 (Rom. iii. 2); C, 1, 3 and 15, 2
(Rom, i, 27); C. 8, 2 (Rom. ix, 21),
> Ignatius. Compare as echoes: Ad Eph, 1, EuXoyifjfXEVlf) TnXKipufjiaTt (Rom.
XV. 29), Ad Magnes, 14. 1, ©sou y^fASTE (Rom, xv, 14). Ad Philadelph. 11. 1.
£6£^aa3E auTOU? (Rom, xv. 7).
' Polycarp. Echo : Ad Phil. C, 1, 2, (xapTCoqsopEi, x.T.X,) comp, Rom, vii. 5,
s These words occur at the close of a warning against censorious judging
similar to the early part of Romans xiv.

POLTCARP. JUSTIN MARTYR. LETTER TO DIOGNETUS. 217
Mart. Polyc. c. 10. 2. "Ecpy 6 dvdinarog' Hslaov rdv drjfiov.
'0 8e HoXvxaqnog slnsv 2s ftiv '/at Xdyov rj^icoaa' 8s8L8dyfisda
ydq aqyaig xat i^ovaiatg vnd rov Qsov rsrayfiivaig rififjv '/ard
TO nqoafjxov, t^v fifj ^Xdnrovaav fjfidg, anovifisiv i'/eivovg de
oiy fjyovfiai d^iovg rov dnoXnysladat airolg. (Rora. xiii. 1 ; Ti
tus iii. 1 ; 1 Pet. ii. 13, &c.)
Ihid. c. 20. 2. Tip de 8vvafiEvoj ndvrag fjfidg slaayayslv iv ry
avrov yaqtri '/at 8wqsEt elg rfjv alwvtov airov fiaaiXeiav, 8id natddg
avrov roi fiovoyevovg lyaov Xqtarov fj dd^a, rififj, xqdrog, fie-
yaXcoavvq elg rovg aliUvag. (Rom. xvi. 25; John i. 18.)
5. Justin Martyr. ^
Bial. c. 23. p. 241 B. (comp. also Dial. c. 11. p. 229 A, and
C. 92. p. 320 A.) Kat ydq airdg 6 'A§qadfi iv d'/qn^varicf dv
8 id T'qv niariv, yv iniarevae np Qsip, i8i'/aiwdy '/at siXoyfjdy,
cog fj yqacpfj aqfiaivsi' rfjv 8i nsqirofiyv sig aqftslov, dXX' oi'/ elg
8t'/atnaivyv sXafisv, wg xat al yqacpat xat rd nqdyfiara dvay/dtst
fjfidg bfioXoyslv. (Rora. iv. 10, 3, 11.)
Bial. c. 27. p. 244 B. Hdvrsg ydq i^k/Xtvav, §occ, ndvreg
dfia yxqeiddyaav oix sartv 6 avvidv, aix sartv ewg evo'g. Taig
y^tijffffatg airdv s8oXiovaav, rdcpog dvsc^y fiivog 6 Xdqvy^ airdv, Idg
aanidwv vnd rd ysiXy aircov, avvrqtftfia '/at raXatnwqia sv ralg
bdnlg airdv, '/at bddv elqfjvqg oi'/ syvwaav.^ (Rora. iii. 11-17.)
Bial. c. 47. p. 266 B. 'H ydq yqyaroryg xat fj cptXavdqwnia
rov Qsov xat rd dfisrqov to'v nXovrov airov x.t.X. (Rora. ii. 4;
comp. also Titus iii. 4.)
6. Letter to Diognetus.^
C. 9. 8. Tt ydq dXXo rdg dfiaqriag fjficov y8vvydy xaXvipat
' Justin, Compare as echoes of Paul's teaching, not always of special passages:
Apol. L 13. p. 60 D (by faith gaining incorruption); Dial. c. 13, p. 229 D (by
faith cleansed through the blood of Christ and His death who died for this) ; Dial.
t, 32, p. 249 D (the seed left for salvation ^ Rom. ix, 27, xi, 5); Dial, c, 39.
p. 257 D (quotation regarding Elias, as in Rom, xi, 3) ; Dial. c. 42. p, 260 D
(quotation of Psalm xix, and Isaiah liii. as in Rom, x, 16-18); Dial, c, 44. p. 262
D (Jewish pride in being Abraham's seed) ; Dial. c. 131. p, 360 D (called through
Christ to salvation prepared by the Father).
^ Compare Ps. xiii, 3; lii, 4; v. 10 ; cxxxix. 4; Isaiah lix, 7, 8.
1 Diognetus. For the relation between this letter and the Pauline Epistles

218

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

y s'/sivov dixaioavvy; sv rivt 8i'/aicod-fjvat dvvardv rovg avdfiovg
yfidg xat aas^slg »j ev ^tio'v^ rip vlip rov Qeov; '^li T^g yXv/eiag
avraXXayfjg, w rrjg dve^iyvidarov dyfiiovqyiag, co rdv dnqoa8o'/-
7JTWV eveqyeaidv , 'iva dvofiia fiiv noXXcov iv dixaicp svt '/qv§y,
8i'/aioavvy 8e svdg noXXovg dvdfinvg dixaiioay. (Corap. Rom. v.
and Rora. xi. 33.)
7. Letter of the Church of Vienne and Lyons.
Eus. H. E. V. 1. "Ovnog Ent8si'/vvfisvoi , ort oi'/ d^ta rd
nadyfiara rov vvv '/aiqov, nqdg rfjv fiiXXovaav dd^av dno'/aXvcp-
drjvat sig fjfidg. (Rora.' viii. 18.)
8. Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
(See before, pp, 1, 2,)
9. Muratorian Canon.
(See before, p, 7.)
10. The Presbyters 1
WHOSE XESTIMONT lEENAEtJS EEPOKTS.
Irenaeus adv. Haer. IV. 27. § 1. Queraadmodura audivi a
quodara presbytero, qui audierat ab his qui apostolos viderant,
et ab his qui didicerant . . .
§ 2. Omnes enim homines egent gloria Bei, justificantur au
tera non a seraetipsis. (Rom. iii. 23.)
Ibid. Non deberaus ergo, inquit ille Senior, superbi esse, ne
que reprehendere veteres; sed ipsi timere, ne forte post agnitio
nem Christi agentes aliquid quod non placeat Deo, remissionem
ultra non habeamus delictorum, sed excludamur a regno ejus.
Et ideo Paulum dixisse: Si enim naturalibus ramis non pepercit,
as regards its use of detached phrases, and its "whole sections constructed with
manifest regard to passages in the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, and
Galatians," see Westcott, Canon, Part, I. § 5, Cotterill's "Peregrinus Proteus"
disparages the letter: see before, page 65, note 1,
» The Presbyters. See p. 71, note 1.

TATIAN. IRENAEUS. ATHENAGORAS. 219
ne forte nec tibi parcat, qui cum esses oleaster, insertus es in
pinguedinem olivae, et socius factus es pinguedinis ejus.^
11. Tatian.
Orat. c. Graec. c. 4. p. 144 D. Tovrov 8id rfjg notya ewg ai
rov lOfiev, xat rfjg 8vvdfiecog avrov rd ddqarov rolg noffjfiaat
'/araXafi^avdfieda. (Rora. i. 20.)
12. Irenaeus.
L. 3. c. 16. § 3. Hoc ipsura interpretatus est Paulus, ^ scri
bens ad Roraanos : " Paulus apostolus Jesu Christi, praedestinatus
in evangeliura Dei, quod promisit per prophetas suos in Scriptu
ris Sanctis de Fiho suo, qui factus est ei ex semine David secun
dura camera, qui praedestinatus est Filius Dei in virtute, per Spi
ritura sanctificationis ex resurrectione mortuorum, Jesu Christi
Domini nostri." Et iterum ad Romanos scribens de Israel, dicit :
"Quorum patres, et ex quibus Christus secundura camera, qui
est Deus super oranes beuedictus in saecula." (Rora. i. 1 ; ix. 5.)
L. 3. c. 16. § 9. Et Paulus autem his consentiens, Romanos
alloquens, ait: "Multo raagis hi, qui abundantiara gratiae et ju-
stitiae accipiunt in vitam, regnabunt per unum Jesura Christura."
(Rom. V. 17.)
13. Athenagoras.
Legatio, p. 10. See before, p. 181.
Ibid. c. 13. p. 13 B. Tt 8i fiot bXo'/avrdaewv, wv fiy 8elrat
b Qedg; Kairot nqoacpsqsiv 8 iov dvaifia'/rov dvaiav, xat rfjv
XoyixfjV nqoadysiv Xarqsiav. (Rom. xii. 1.)
Ibid. c. 34. p. 37 C. Ol ydq dyoqdv anqaavrsg noqvsiag,
xat xaraywydg ddiafiovg nenoiyfisvoi rolg vioig ndayg alayqdg
fjdovfjg xat fiy8E rdv dqaivwv cpetddfievoi , dqaeveg ev aqaeat rd
deivd xareqyatdfievot, bawv asfivdrsqa xai sveidiarsqa awfiara
navToiwg aird v^qitovreg, drifiovvreg xat rd noiyrdv rov Qeov
¦xaXdv. (Rom. i. 24 &c.)
» Two sentences before this an echo of Rom. vi, 9 occurs. Comp. Routh's
Rei, Sac, 1, 52.
' Irenaeus. The first quotation naming Paul.

220 epistle to the Romans.

14. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. I. 14. p. 79. '0 ydq 8nvg ardfia sig rd XaXelv, xal
nXdaag ovg elg rd dxoveiv, '/at notyaag ocpdaXfiovg elg rd bqdv,
i^erdaet rd ndvra xat '/qtvsl rd 8i'/ainv, dnn8i8ovg sxdarii) xard
d^iav rdv fiiaddv. Tolg fiiv xad vnofiovfjv 8id sqywv dyadwv
tyrovaiv rfjv dcpdaqaiav 8wqyaerat ^wijv alwvtov, x«?<i'') slqyvyv,
dvdnavaiv, '/at nX'ijdq dyaddiv, wv ome dipdaXfidg eldsv, ome
ovg yxovaev, ovre int xaqdiav dvdqwnov dvi^y. Tolg de a?ri-
aroig, xat xaracpqnvyralg '/at dnstdnvai rfj dXydsia, netdoftivoig
8s rfj a8txia, indv ificpvqwvrat fiotxeiaig, '/at noqvsiaig, xat
dqasvo'/oiriatg, xat nXsovs^iaig , xat ralg ddsfiirotg sl8wXoXa-
rqeiatg, e'arai dqyfj '/at d-vfidg, dXlipig '/at arevoywqia' xai to
riXog rovg roiovrovg xadi^et nvq alwviov. (Rom. ii. 6, &c.)
Lbid. LLL. 14. p. 126. Kat diddo'/et dno8i8dvat ndat rd
ndvra, rip rfjv rififjv r-yv rtfi-qv, np rdv cpd^ov rdv cpd§ov, rep
rdv cpdqov rdv cpdqov, fiydevt fiydiv dcpeXelv y fidvov rd dyandv
ndvrag. (Rom. xiii. 7, 8.)
15. Clement op Alexandria.
Paedag. I. 8. § 70. (p. 140.) "'Idi ovv,'' cpyaiv 6 HavXog,
"yqyardryra xat dnnrn fiiav Qeov, int fiiv rovg neadvrag, dno-
TOfiiav, ent 8i ae, 'yqyardryra, idv inifisivrjg ry yqyardrqrt,"
rovriart ry sig Xqiardv niarsi. (Rom. xi. 22.)
Strom. III. 11. § 75. (p. 544.) 'Ofioiwg de xat b HavXog sv rfj
nqdg 'Pwjiaiovg sniaroXfj yqdcpet, "O'inveg dnsddvofisv ry dfiaq-
riq, ndg I'ti ^^ffo/iev ev airjj; . . . 'on 6 yra^atdg fjfidv avdqco
nog avvearavqwdy, tva '/araqyydjj rd adfia rfjg dfiaqriag,'' ewg,
" fiy 8s naqiardvere rd fiiXy vfidv bnXa d8ixiag ry dfiaqria."
(Rom. vi. 2, 6, 13.) 16. Tertullian.
Be corona, c. 6. Nec natura vos, inquit, docet? ut cum ad
Romanos, natura facere dicens nationes ea quae sunt legis, et
legem naturalem suggerit, et naturalera legalem. (Rora. c. ii.)
Scorpiace, c. 13. Sicut et ad Roraanos (sc. Paulus inquit):
"Non solum autem, verum etiam exultantes in pressuris, certi

tertullian. origen. 221
quod pressura tolerantiara perficit, tolerantia vero probationem,
probatio autem spera, spes vero non confundit." (Rora. v. 3-5.)
Adv. Praxean. c. 13. Solura autem Christura potero Deura
dicere, sicut idem apostolus: Ex quibus Christus, qui est, inquit,
Deus super omnia benedictus in aevum omne.
CHAPTEES XV. AND XVI.
17. Origen.
Comment, in Ep. ad Bom. Tora. IV. p. 687. (Migne, IV.
1290.) Caput hoc (xvi. 25-27) Marcion, a quo Scripturae evan
gelicae atque apostolicae interpolatae sunt, de hac Epistola pe
nitus a,bstulit. Et non solura hoc, sed et ab eo loco ubi scrip
tura est: "Omne autem quod non est ex fide, peccatum est"
(xiv. 23), usque ad finem cuncta dissecuit. In ahis vero exera-
plaribus, id est, in his quae non sunt a Marcione temerata, hoc
ipsum caput (xvi. 25-27) diverse positum invenimus. In non-
nuUis etenira codicibus post eum locum quem supra diximus (xiv.
23), hoc est : " Omne autem, quod non est ex fide, peccatum est,"
statim cohaerens habetur: "Ei autem qui potens est vos con
firmare." Ahi vero codices in fine id, ut nunc est positum, con
tinent. ^
' The only other passage from ancient authors that cau be quoted against the
genuineness of the 15'h and le'h chapters is Tertullian adv. Marc, c, 5, 14, who
says, "Bene autem quod et in clausula (xiv. 10) tribunal Christi comminatur, "
This is needlessly supposed to indicate that the words were at the very end of the
Epistle in Tertullian's opinion. But on internal grounds many in recent times
have rejected those chapters, or received them only iu part. Some (including
Griesbach) put the Doxology (xvi. 25-27) after xiv, 23, Others reject it also,
Baur (Paulus, Part II. c. 3) finds in those two chapters the work of a disciple of
Paul who wished to soften the keen Anti-Judaism of the Apostle by something
more palatable to the Judaizers. Davidson, Int. to N. T, Vol, I, p. 134, rejects
chapter xvi, and the Doxology, but retains chapter xv. Hilgenfeld, Einl. p. 320,
retains both chapters, but rejects the Doxology (p, 326). Semler, Eichhorn, Schulz,
Ewald, and others, consider the chapters (or large portions of them) Pauline, but
out of their place in this Epistle. So also Reuss (Gesch, § 111) says, the whole
of the last chapter is a separate letter of commendation for Phoebe to take to
some place or other — Ephesus? See external testimonies to the chapters in Tisch,,
Nov. Test., and outline of recent opinions in Hilgenfeld's Einleitung and Man
gold's Bleek's Einleitung.

222
XIV.
FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.^
{compare sections i, ii.)
1. Barnabas.
C. 4. 9. See also c. 6. 5. Fqdcpetv eanov8aaa, neqiipyfia^
Vfiiov. (1 Cor. iv. 1 3.)
2. Clement op Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 20. 4. Tfj '/vocpoqovaa '/ard rd diXyjia airov rolg iSiotg
'/aiqolg rfjv navnXydy dvdqwnotg rs xat drjqatv xat ndaiv rolg
ovaiv in' airfjg tdotg dvariXXst rqocpfjv. (Comp. 1 Cor. xv. 38.)
C. 24. 1. Karavoyawfiev , dyanyrot, niirg b 8eandryg int-
8ei'/vvrai 8iyvexwg yfilv T'qv fiiXXovaav dvdaraaiv eaeadai, ^g
T^v dnaqxyv enoffjaaro rdv Kvqtov 'lyaofrv sx vS'/qdv dvaar'fj-
aag. (1 Cor. xv. 20-23.)
C. 24. 5. 'E^fjXdsv b ansiqwv '/at s'^aXev elg tijv yfjv sr/aarov
Tttiv ansqfidrwv drtva nsadvza eig tijv yfjv ^yqd '/at yvjivd 8ta-
Xverat, x.t.X. (1 Cor. xv. 26; Mat. xiii. 3.)
C. 34. 8. Aiyst ydq' 'OcpdaXfidg oix el8ev xat ovg oi'x yxov
aev '/at snt '/aqdiav dvdqwnov oix dvi^rj baa fjzoifiaas rolg vno-
fiivovatv airdv. (1 Cor. ii. 9; comp. Is. lxiv. 4.)^
C. 37. 4. Ol fieydXot diya rHv fuxqdv oi 8vvavrai stvat, civre
nl fii'/qot 8ixci rdv fisydXwv avy/qaaig rig sartv sv ndat, /at
iv TOVTOig yqfjaig. Ad^wfiev rd aiofia fjfidv. 'H '/ecpaXfj 8ixa
rdv no8dv oi8EV sartv, ovrwg ov8i ol n68eg 8ixa rrjg 'xecpaXfjg'
> Corinthians, The genuineness of this Epistle is not disputed.
> Barnabas. Tc'ptijjirifia is a word frequently used by the early fathers. Its
strong figure seems to have laid hold of thera.
1 Clement. Add as echoes or suggestions — some of many — in the Preface,
xX-riroii; if)Yia5(J,£vot; (1 Cor. i. 1); c. 5. 5, ppapefov, (1 Cor, ix, 24; Phil. iii. 14);
u. 19, 1, 2 (1 Cor, ix, 24, and Heb, xii. l),
2 See Lightfoot's note in loc, and comp, below on Hegesippus.

CLEMENT OP ROME. 223
rd 8e sXaxtara jiiXy zov adfiarng fjfiiov avay/ala '/at evyqyard
ianv oXcj) rd awfiari. 'AXXd ndvra avfinvsl, xat vnorayjj jii^
Xqfjzat elg rd adteadat 'dXov rd adfia. (1 Cor. xii. 12, &c.)
C. 47. 1. AvaXd§srs tjjv iniarnXfjv rov fia'/aqiov HavXov
rov anoardXov. Ti nqcorov vfilv iv dqyfj rov siayysXiov syqaxpsv;
En aXrjdsiag nvsvfianxdg i7riarsiXsv Vfilv, nsqt savrov re xat
Kycpd re '/at 'AndXXw, did rd '/at rdrs nqoaxXiasig vfidg ns-
notfjadat. (1 Cor. iii. 13, &c.)
C. 48. 6. Kat tyrslv rd '/oivcocpeXig ndatv, xai fiy rd savrov.
(1 Cor. X. 24.)
C. 49. 1. '0 e^wv dydnyv iv Xqianp notyadno rd rov Xqt
arov naqayyiXfiara. Tdv dsafidv T^g dydnyg rov Qsov rig dvv
arat i^yyfjaaadat ; Td fisyaXslov rfjg '/aXXovyg airov rig dq/srdg
s^stnslv; Td vxpog, sig o dvdyet fj dydnrj dve'/dirjyyrdv iaztv.
Aydny '/oXXq fjfidg rip Qecp' dydny xaXvnret nXfjdog dfiaqridv
ay any ndvra aviysrrat, ndvra fia'/qod^vfiel' ovdiv ^dvavaov iv
ayanjj, ov8sv -hnsq-rjcpavov aydny ayiafia ovx s'xst, aydny ov
araaidtei, dydny ndvra jcoisl iv bfiovoicc' iv rfj dydny irsXsid-
dqaav ndvrsg ol i'/Xs'/rot rov Qsov' diya aydnyg ov8iv svdqs-
ardv ianv np Qsip. 'Ev dydny nqoasXd^sro fjfidg 6 dsandrqg'
did rfjv dydnqv, yv eayev nqdg fjfidg, to atfia airov sdw/sv vniq
fjfiiov 'lyaovg Xqiardg b Kvqiog fjfidv, iv dsX-qfiart Qeov, '/at rfjv
adqxa vniq rrjg aaq'/dg fjfiwv, 'xat tijv xpvyfjv vniq rdv xpvydv
fjfidv. 'Oqdre dyanyrot, jcdg fiiya xat davjiaardv effTtv fj aydnq,
xat rfjg reXstdrrjtog airfjg oi'/ sartv i^fjyyatg. (1 Cor. xiii.)
Second Epistle.^
C 9. 3. /let ovv fjfidg dg vadv Qeov cpvXdaaeiv rfjv adq'/a.
(1 Cor. vi. 19.)
C. 11. 7. 'Edv ovv norfjacofiev rfjv dixaioavvqv ivavziov rov
Qeov, elafj^Ofiev elg rfjv ^aaiXeiav airov xat XyxpdfieOa rdg i7zay-
yeXiag, ag ovg oi'/ 'rj'/ovaev aids ocpdaXfidg el8ev, oi8i e/ri /aq-
8iav dv-dqwnov dvs^q. (1 Cor. ii. 9.)
C. 14. 5. O'vrs E^sinslv Ttg dvvarat ovre XaXqaat a iroifia-
aev b Kvqiog rolg ixXe'/rolg airov. (1 Cor. ii. 9.)
' Compare as echoes: C. 1, 8, comp 1 Cor. i. 29 (see on Rom, iv. 17).
C, 5. 1. (^IeXSeiv ix TOU xdofiou toutou) comp. 1 Cor. v, 10. C. 5, 6, (Christians
strangers iu the world) 1 Cor, vii, 29-31.

224 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.

3. Hermas.
Sim. V. 7. 2. 'Edv fitdvjjg rfjv adqxa aov, jitavslg '/at rd
nvEVfia TO ayiov sdv 8i jiidvyg rd nvsvfia, ov tv'^Il- (1 Cor.
iii. 17.)
4. Ignatius.^
Ad Ephes. c. 2. 2. Hqinov ovv sartv xard ndvra rqdnov
8o^dtsiv 'lyaovv Xqiardv rdv do^daavra vfidg, 'iva sv fitd vno
rayjj '/ary qna fiiv ot, vnoraaadfisvot rip inia'/dncij, xat np nqsa-
^vrsqicj], xard ndvra yrs yyiaajiivot. (1 Cor. i. 10.)
Ad Ephes. c. 8. 2. Ol aaq'/r/ot rd nvsvfiari'/d nqdaasiv ov
dvvavrai, oi8E ol nvevfiarr/nl rd aaqxr/d. (1 Cor. ii. 14.)
Ad Ephes. c. 16. 1. My nXavdade, d8eXcpoi fiov ol ol'/o-
cpddqot ^aaiXeiav Qeov oi xXyqovofir'jaovatv. (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10.)
Ad Ephes. C. 18. 1. Ileqixpyfia rd ijidv 7tvevfia rov aravqov,
o ianv O'/dvdaXov rolg aniarovaiv, fjfilv de awryqia, '/at t^fj
alwviog. Hov aocpdg; nov avtyrrjzrjg ; nov '/avyyaig rdv Xsyo
fiivwv awsrdv; (1 Cor. i. 18-24.)
Ad Magnes. c. 10. 2. 'Ynsqdsads ovv rfjv '/a'/qv S^/tJ^v, tijv
naXaiwdslaav '/at svo^iaaaav , xat fisra^dXsads sig viav tvfiqv,
0 effTiv 'irjaovg Xqiardg. (1 Cor. v. 7, 8.)
Ad Roman. C. 5. 1. 'And Svqiag fiixqt 'Pdfiyg dqqiofia'yco,
did yfg '/at daXdaayg, vv/rdg '/at fjfiiqag, 8s8sfiivog 8i'/a Xen-
ndq8otg, b iart arqaruort'/dv rdyfia' o'i '/at eieqysrovfisvot x^t-
qovg yivovrat. 'Ev de Toig d8t'/fjfiaatv airdv fidXXov fiadqrsvo-
fiai, dXX' oi naqd rovrn 8s8i'/aiwfiat. (1 Cor. iv. 2-4; comp.
2 Cor. xi. 23 &c.)
Ad Boman. c. 9. 2. Oi8i ydq d^tdg slfii, cov sayarog airdv
'/at E'/rqwfia. 'AXX' -fjXiyfiai rig sivai, idv Qsov inirvxco. (1 Cor.
XV. 8-10; 1 Cor. vii. 25; comp. 1 Tim. i. 13, 16.)
Ad Philadelph. 7. 1. El ydq '/at xard adq'/a jis Ttveg ydiX
yaav nXavfjaat, dXXd to nvsvfia oi nXavdrat, dnd Qsov 'dv.
' Compare as echoes: Ad Eph, 2. 2, xaTiQpTta(j|,£vot, x.t.X. comp. 1 Cor, i, 10.
Ad Eph. 4, 2, (jisXt) (1 Cor. vi. 15), Ibid, 8, 1, 7csp£4ni(ia (1 Cor. iv. 13), comp.
18. 1, Ibid, 13, 1, £tA to auTo' (1 Cor. xi. 20), comp. 5, 3. Ad TraU. 12, 3,
ddo'xtixo; (1 Cor, ix, 27). Ad Rom. 4. 3, ^XEu^epo; (1 Cor, ix, 1 ; vii 22), Ibid.
5. 1, iiipiofiaxw (1 Cor. xv, 32).

POLYCARP. MARTYRDOM OP POLYCARP. JUSTIN MARTYR. 225
Oidsv ydq, nddev Eqysrai, '/at nov vndyst xat rd '/qvnrd iXiyysi.
(1 Cor. xiv. 25.)
Ad Smyrn. c. 11. 1. 'H nqoasvyfj vfidv dnfjXdsv snt ryv ex-
xXyaiav rfjv iv 'Avnoysi^ rfjg 2vqiag' o,9-ev 8s8sfiivog dsonqen-
eardrotg 8safinlg, ndvrag dandtofiat, ni'/ wv d^ing i'/sldsv
sivai, s'axarng avriov wv '/ard diXyfia 8i '/ary^iddyv, oix ex
ffuveido'Tog, dXX' ex xc^Qi'^^og Qeov, yv evyofiat reXeiav fioi 8odfj-
vat, 'iva iv rjj nqoasvyfj vjidv Qsov intrvyw. (1 Cor. xv. 8-10;
comp. 1 Tim. i. 13, 16.) '
5. Polycarp. 1
Philipp. c. 5. 3. Kat cfvrs ndqvot, crvre fiaXa'/ot, o'vre dqaev-
O'/olzai (iaaiXeiav Qeov '/Xqqovofiyanvaiv , o'vrs ol nninvvzsg rd
'drnna. (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10.)
Ibid. c. 11. 2. Si quis non abstinuerit se ab avaritia, ab idol-
olatria coinquinabitur, et tanquam inter gentes judicabitur qui
ignorant judicium domini.^ (1 Cor. v. 11; comp. Ephes. v. 5;
Col. iii. 5.)
Lbid. "Aut nescimus, quia sancti raundurajudicabunt?" Sicut
Paulus docet. (1 Cor. vi. 2.)
6. Martyrdom of Polycarp.
C. 2. 3. JT^o ncpdaXfidv ydq slyov cpvyelv rd alwviov -/at fiydi-
nore a§svvvfievov nvq , '/at rolg rfjg '/aqdiag ocpdaXfiolg avi§Xen-
ov rd ryqnifieva rolg 'vnofieivaatv ayadd, a ovre ovg y/ovasv,
o'vze dcpdaXftdg^.eldev, o'vze int '/aqdiav dvdqwnov dvi^y.^ (1 Cor.
ii. 9.)
7. Justin Martyr.^
Apol. L. 19. p. 65 E. Tdv airdv rqdnov Xoyiaaads ozt dia-
Xvdivza '/at 8i/yv ansqfiarcov sig yfjv avuXvdsvra rd dvdqdnsia
' Polycarp. Compare as Echoes: Phil, 3, 1, comp. 1 Cor. xv. 28 ; 11, 4,
comp. 1 Cor, xii, 26,
> This and the following pa.ssage are only found in the Latin translation,
1 Martyrd, of Polyc, This prophecy is used of the future not of the spir
itual state in this psissage; which is not the scripture sense.
1 Justin, Compare as Echoes; Apol, I. 19. p. 65 E, a(o',uaTa . . . a9Sap5iav
15

226 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.
acofiara '/ard '/aiqdv nqoard^si Qsov dvaaryvai, xat dcpd-aqaiav
ivdvaaadai oi'/ ddivarov. (1 Cor. xv. 53.)
Apol. L. 60. p. 93 B. 'iig awslvat oi aocpicc dvdqconeict ravra
ysynvivai, dXXd 8vvdfist Qsnv Xiysadai. (1 Cor. ii. 4.)
Bial. c. 14. p. 231 D. Tomo ydq iart rd avfi^oXov rdv dtv-
fiwv, 'iva ftq rd naXaid rfjg xa'/fjg tifiyg s'qya nqdrryrs. (1 Cor.
V. 8.) Bial. c. 39. p. 258 A. O'i '/at Xafi^dvovat dofiara 's'/aarog
dg d^tOL slat, cpcontdfisvni did rov dvdfiarng rnv Xqiarov roirov.
'O fiiv ydq Xafi^dvst avviaswg nvsvfia, b di ^ovXfjg, b ds layiog,
b de Idascog, b 8i nqoyvwaswg, 6 de 8i8aa'/aXiag, b de cpdqov
Qsov. See also Dial. c. 87. p. 314 B D for further comment on
Isaiah xi. 2. [corap. also Cohort, ad Gentiles c. 32.] (1 Cor.
xii. 7-10.)
Bial. c. 41. p. 260 A. Tvnog yv rov dqrov T^g svyaqiariag,
ov eig avdfivyaiv roiJ nddovg, nv s'nadev vniq rdv '/adaiqofii-
vcov rdg ipvydg dnd ndayg novqqiag dvdqdnwv, 'lyaovg Xqiardg
b Kvqiog fjfiiov naqsdwxs notslv. Corap. 1 Cor. xi. 24; Luke
xxii. 19.
Bial. c. 111. p. 338 C. 'Hv ydq rd ndaya 6 Xqiardg, b rv-
¦dstg varsqov. (1 Cor. v. 7.)
8. Letter to Diognetus.
C. 5. 15. Aotdoqovvrat xat svXoyovaiv. (1 Cor. iv. 12.)
C. 12, 5. "Hv 8vvafiiv svtddv 6 ayroffTo^og t)jv ts dvsv dXy
dsiag nqoardyfiarog elg t^'rjv aa'/ovfiivqv yvcoaiv fisficpdfisvog,
Xsysi' fj yvioaig cpvatol, y 8i dydnrj ol'xo8ofisi. (1 Cor.
vui. 1.)
9. The Presbyters
WHOSE lESTIMONI IRENAEUS REPOETS.
Irenaeus adv. Haer. IV. 27. 3. Et hoc autera Apostolura in
Epistola quae est ad Corinthios, manifestissirae ostendisse, di-
i-tSiaaatai, so also Apol, I, 52. p. 86 B, tvSuaEi dtpSapoiav [and Cohort, ad Gentiles
c, 35 Piety not in word but in deed 1 Cor, iv. 20] [and De Resur. c, 10 (1 Cor.
XV. 53)]; Dial, c, 35 and c, 51 (prediction of heresies, comp. 1 Cor. xi, 19, and
see before, p. 125, note l) ; Dial, c, 39, p, 258 A (the gifts of the .spirit); Dial
u. 41. p, 261 A (many members and one body) 1 Cor. xii. 12,

HEGESIPPUS. TATIAN. 227
centem: Nolo enim vos ignorare, fratres, quoniam patres nostri
omnes sub nube fuerunt, et omnes in Mose baptizati sunt in nube
et in mari, &c. 1 Cor. x. 1-11. (See also § 2 for 1 Cor. x. 11.)
10. Hegesippus.
Extract from 'Stephanus Gobarus in Photius, Bibl. [see Routh's
Eel. Sac. Vol.1, p. 219]. After quoting Ta yroifiaafiiva rolg 8i/-
ainig dyadd ovrs dcp9-aXfi()g si8sv nvrs ovg y'/ovasv o'vrs int '/aq
diav dvdqconov dvifiq Stephanus Gobarus proceeds 'ifyjjffiTTTrog fiiv
rot . . . fiarfjv fiiv elqfjadat ravra Xiyet '/at '/araxpev8eadai rovg
ravra cpafiivovg rdv re deiwv yqacpcov xai rov Kvqiov Xiyovrog
Ma/dqiot nl dcp'JaXfiot vfiiov '/.r.X. (1 Cor. ii. 9; corap. Mat.
xiii. 16.) See Lightfoot, Galatians, 2"* Ed., p. 320 and note. He
gesippus is reasoning against a misuse of the quotation; is not
disputing its authority, as Baur would have it. See Routh, Eel.
Sac., Vol. I. p. 281.
11. Syriac and Old Latin Versions and Muratorian Canon.
See before, pp. 1, 2, 6, 7.
12. Tatian. 1
Oratio ad Qraecos, c. 15. p. 25 B. Td 8i rotovrov T^g ffuff-
Taffewg etdog ei fiiv dg vadg jj, '/arotxslv iv ainp ^ovXsrai Qsdg
did rov nqsa§evnvzog nvevfiarog. (1 Cor. iii. 16.)
Clem. Alex. Strom. III. 12. p. 547. Tanavdv oifiat rdv Svqov
rd TOtavra roXfidv dnyftariteiv. Iqdcpei ynvv '/ard Xi^iv iv np
neqt rov '/ard rdv awryqa '/araqnaftcrv " Svficpcovia ftiv ovv dq-
fidtei Tcqoaevyfj, xoivwvia di cpd-oqdg Xvsi rfjv svrsv^iv." Haw
yovv dvawnyri'/wg did T^g avyycoqijascog siqysi, ndXiv ydq "ini
raird" avyycoqfjaag "ysviadai, did rdv aazavdv '/at rfjv a'/qaa-
iav," rdv nsiadyadfisvov "dvat '/vqioig fiiXXeiv dnvXeveiv" a/re-
cpfjvarn, did fiiv avficpwviag Qecp, did 8s rfjg davficpwviag d/qaa-
ice '/at noqveicji xai 8ia^dXiij." Tavza de cpqat rdv dndaroXov
> There is probably an echo of 1 Cor. ii, 14 in Tatian's Oratio ad Graecos
t, 15 where he distinguishes tji'-'X^'^o' '^'¦°'" TtveujxaTi 0£oO 9paupounevoi. 15*

228 FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.
E^yyovfiEvog, aocp'iterat di tijv dX'ijdeiav 81 dXydovg xpev8og xa-
Taffxewa'^wv. (1 Cor. vii. 5.)
Iren. adv. haeres. III. 23. 8. Tatian us . . . tentans et sub-
inde uti hujusraodi a Paulo assidue dictis: Quoniam "in Adam
omnes moriraur;" ignorans autera, quoniam "ubi abundavit pec
catum, superabundavit gratia." (1 Cor. xv. 22; Rom. xv. 20.)^
13. Athenagoras.
Be resurrect, mort. c. 18. Ov ydq adterai rd '/ar' d^iav iv
rip naqdvrt ^icjj' did rn noXXovg fiiv ddiovg '/at ndaav dvofiiav
'/at '/a'/iav sntry8svovTag fiiyqt TsXsmyg 8iarsXslv xaxtSv ansiq-
drovg, '/at rovvavriov rovg '/ard ndaav aqszfjv s^rjzaajiivnv zdv
savrdv ^inv ini8si§afiivovg iv odi'vatg CJ;v, ev inyqsiatg, iv av/-
ncpavrtaig, alxiaig rs '/at navrniaig xa'/nnadsiaig. . . . Ev8rjXnv
navrt rd Xsindfievnv, 'on del '/ard rdv annarnXnv rd cpd-aqrnv
TO'VTO '/al axedaardv ivdvaaadai acpdaqaiav, 'iva, t^onntydivrcov
6^ dvaardaswg rcov vs'/qcodivrwv '/at ndXiv svwdivrwv rcov xe-
ywqiOfiivwv y '/at ndvry dtaXsXvfiivwv, 's'/aarog '/nfiiayrai 8t'/aicog
a 8id TOV adfiarog snqa^sv, etre dyadd, s'lrs '/axd. (1 Cor. xv.
54; 2Cor. V. 10.)
Ibid. C. 19. El fiiv ydq fiy8sfiia fiySafiov nov dvdqwnnig
nsnqay fiivwv yivniro '/qiatg, ni8iv s^ovai nXslov rcov dXdywv
dvdqwnot' fidXXov ds xd'/sivwv nqd^ovatv ddXidzsqov, ol rd
nddrj dovXaywyovvrsg '/at cpqovritovrsg svasfisiag '/at di'/aioaivrjg
y rfjg dXXrjg dqsrfjg, b di '/ryvc68yg ^iog dqiarog, aqsry 8i dvdq-
rog, di'xjyg de ansiXy yiXcog nXarvg, rd de ndaav dsqansvsiv
fjdnvfjv ayaddv rd fiiyiarnv, dnyfia de xotvdv rovrwv dndvrwv
'/at vdfiog sig rd rolg d'/oXdaroig '/at Xdyvotg cpiXnv. (Ddyio-
fisv '/at niwfisv' avqiov ydq dnoOvyaxofisv. (1 Cor. xv. 30 &c.
Comp. Isa. xxii. 13.)
Legatio, c. 12. Eld' ol ftiv rdv ^iov rovrov vofiitovTsg, (Dd-
ywfisv '/at niwfisv, avqiov ydq dnodvya'/Ofisv , '/at rdv ddvarov
§advv vnvov xai Xfjdrjv ndifisvoi {ijnvco xat davdrco dtdvfidovs)
ntarsvovTai dsoas^slv. (1 Cor. xv. 32. Comp. Isa. xxii. 13.)
2 See Otto's note on this passage. Otto's Tatian, p, 168,

THEOPHILUS. IRENAEU^. CLEMENT. TERTULLIAN. 229

14. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. L. 2. p. 70. Ael^ov ovv '/at av aeavrnv, sl ni'/ sl
fioi'yog, et ov/ el ndqvog, e't nv/ et xXinryg, sl oi'/ el dqna^, el
ov/ et anoareqyrfjg, el ov/ ei dqaevoxoiryg, el oi'/ el vfiqiaryg,
Sl ov/ Sl Xoidoqog, sl ov/ dqyiXng, sl ni cpOnveqdg, el oi'/ dXa-
Xatcov, ei ovy vneqdnrqg, el oi 7cXfjXrrjg, el oi cpiXdqyvqog, el
ov ynvslaiv a7ceidfjg, el ni rd rk/va anv ncoXelg. Toig ydq ravra
nqaaaovaiv o Qsdg oix ificpavitsrai, idv fifj nqdrrov savrovg xad-
aqiacoaiv dnd navrdg finXvOfiov. (1 Cor. vi. 9.)
Ibid. L. 13. p. 77. Ti de '/at oiyt fj tcDv ansqfidrwv '/at '/aqniov
yivofiivq i^avdaraaig] '/at rovro sig rfjv yqqatv riov dvD-qdncov ;
El ydq rvyoi slnslv, xo'xxog airov y rdv Xotndv aneqfidnov, indv
pXydfj elg t?)v yfjv, nqwzov dnodvrja'/st '/at Xvsrai, slza iyetqe-
rat, '/at yiverat ardyvg. (1 Cor. xv. 36, 37.)
15. Irenaeus.
B. III. 11. 9. In ea enira epistola quae est ad Corinthios,
de propheticis charismatibus diligenter loquutus est, et scit viros
et muheres in ecclesia prophetantes. (1 Cor. xi. 4, 5.)

16. Clement of Alexandria.
Paedag. I. 6. p. 117. 2aipiarara yovv 6 fiaxdqtog HavXog
anyXXa^sv fjfidg T^g ^jyT^ffewg ev rfj nqoriqix 7Cqng Knqivdiovg
iniaroXf co8i nwg yqdcpcov 'AdeXcpot, fiy naidia yiveade
ralg cpqealv, dXXd rfj '/a'/iq v?j?rta' ^eTe, Taig de cpqsatv
riXstot yivsade.'^ (1 Cor. xiv. 20.)
17. Tertullian.
Be praescript. c. 33. Paulus in priraa ad Corinthios notat
negatores et dubitatores resurrectionis.
' Clement goes on to cite 1 Cor. xiii. 11, and recurs to it in c. 34, His
quotations from 1 Cor. are numerous.

230

XV.
SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.
{compare sections i-ih. xi. xii.)
1. Clement of Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 5. 5. See before, p. 209. (2 Cor. xii. 20.)
Second Epistle.^
2. Ignatius. ^
3. Polycarp.
Philipp. c. 2. 2. '0 8s sysiqag airdv ix vs'/qdv '/at fjfidg
iysqsl, idv noidfiev airov rd d^iXyfia. (2 Cor. iv. 14.)
Ibid. c. 4. 1. 'OnXiawfieda rolg bnXoig T^g di'/aioavvyg.
(2 Cor. vi. 7.)
Lbid. c. 6. 1. See before, under Romans, (2 Cor. viii. 21 and
Rom. xii. 17.)
4. Letter to Diognetus.
C. 5. 8. 'Ev aaq'/t rvyydvovatv, aXX oi '/ard adq'/a tdaiv. 'Ent
yyg diarqi^ovaiv, aXX' ev oiqavip noXtreiovrat' neidovrat rolg
dqtafiivoig vdfioig, xat rolg l8iotg /Jt'otg vtxtSffi Toiig vOjitotig" dyan-
dai Tcdvrag, '/at vnd ndvzcov dtdxovrat' dyvoovvrat, '/at v-ara-
'/q'lvovrat ' davarovvrai, xat toionoiovvTai ' nrwysiovat, '/at nXovr-
itovai noXXovg' ndvrwv varsqovvrai, xat iv ndat nsqtaasvov-
aiv • arifiovvrai, '/at sv ralg artfiiaig do^dtovrat ' ^Xaacpqfiovvrai,
-/at di'/aiovvrai' Xoidoqovvzai , '/at eiXoyovaiv v^qitovrat, xat
• Compare as Echoes c, 30, G, self praise, (2 Cor. i. 17, 18; Rom. ii. 29);
K. 36, 2, ivoTCTpiSo'neio (2 Cor. iii. 18).
2 Compare as Echoes c. 1, 2 (2 Cor. ix, 6); c, 2, 4 (2 Cor, vi, 18),
' Ignatius. Echo— Trail. 3. 3 cpe(5o(J,ai (2 Cor, xii, 6).

ATHENAGORAS. THEOPHYLUS. IRENAEUS. TIIE PRESBYTERS. 231
Tificoaiv dyadonoinvvTsg, cog xa'/nt '/oXdtovrat' '/oXatdfievnt x^^iQ-
ovatv, wg t^oonoiovfievot. (2Cor. x. 3; vi. 8-10.)
5. Athenagoras.
Be resurrect, mort. c. 18. (See before, under 1 Corinthians.
6. Theophilus. ^
Ad Autolyc. I. 2. p. 70. 'Eavrovg '/adaqiaioaiv dnd navrdg
fioXvOfiov. (2 Cor. vii. 1.)
Ibid. I. 7. 'p. 74. "Orav anddy rd dvrjzdv, '/at ivdiay rfjv
dcpdaqaiav, rdre 'oipy xard d^iav rdv Qedv. (2 Cor. v. 4.)
Ibid. LII. 4. p. 119. Oqdvifing ydq iov fjdiwg fiwqwv dviyy.
(2 Cor. xi. 19.)
7. Syriac and Old Latin Versions and Muratorian Canon.
See before, pp, 1, 2, 6, 7,
8. Irenaeus.
B. III. 7. 1. Quod autem dicunt, aperte Paulura in secunda
ad Corinthios dixisse: "In quibus Deus saeculi hujus excaecavit
men tes infidelium ; " et alterum quidera Deum esse saecuU hujus
dicunt, alterum vero qui sit super omnera principatum, et initium,
et potestatera: non suraus nos in causa, si hi, qui quae super
Deura sunt raysteria scire se dicunt, ne quidera legere Paulura
sciunt. (2 Cor. iv. 4.)
B. IV. 28. 3. Nam et apostolus ait in epistola secunda ad
Corinthios: "Quoniam Christi suavis odor suraus Deo, et in his
qui salvi fiunt, et in his qui pereunt: quibusdara quidera odor
mortis in mortem, quibusdara autera odor vitae in vitara." (2 Cor.
ii. 15, 16.)
9. The Presbyters
WHOSE TESTIMONI IRENAEUS REPOETS.
Iren. V. 5. 1. Aid xat Xiyovatv ol nqsa^vrsqoi , rdv ano-
' Compare as Echo: II. 1, JStuTT)? tu Xoyo) (2 Cor. xi. 6),

232 SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.
ardXcov fiadyrat, rovg fisrarsd-ivrag ixslas fieraredfjvat' 8i'/aioig
ydq avdqwnoig xat nvevfiarocpdqotg fjzotfidadrj 6 naqddeiaog, iv cp
xat HavXog dndarnXog ela'/Ofiiadetg 'rj/nvaev d^qyra ^fjfiara, dg
nqdg yfidg iv np naqdvrt, xd'/el fisvstv rovg fisrarsdivrag 'scog
awrsXsiag nqooifiiatofiivovg Trp> dcpdaqaiav. (2 Cor. xii. 4.)
10. Clement of Alexandria. ^
Strom. IV. 16. p. 607. Tavra fiiv 7csqt rfjg yvwaswg b dnd
aroXog. TfjV di xoivfjv didao'/aXiav rfjg niarswg "'da fiyv yvcda-
scog" s'iqq'/sv iv ry dsvriqi^ nqdg Koqivdiovg. (2 Cor. ii. 14.)
""A'xqt ydq t% a-qfisqov fjfiiqag, rd aird '/dXvfifia rolg noXXolg
int rfj dvayvwast rfjg naXaidg' diad-y'/yg fiivst," fifj dva'/dXvnrd-
fisvnv '/ard tijv nqdg rdv Kiqtov intarqocpyv. (2 Cor. iii. 14.)
11. Tertullian.
Be pudicit. c. 13. Revera enira suspicantur apostolura Pau
lum in secunda ad Corinthios eidem fornicatori veniam dedisse
quem in prima dedendum Satanae in interitum carnis pronun-
tiarit,! impium patris de matrimonio haeredem, quasi vel ipsum
postea stilum verterit scribens: "Si quis autem contristavit, non
me contristavit; sed ex parte, ne'vos onerem omnes. Satis est
talis increpatio quae a multis fit. Uti e contrarie malitis vos
donare et advocare, ne forte abundantiore tristitia devoretur ejus-
raodi. Propter quod oro vos, constituatis in eura dilectionem.
In hoc enim et scripsi, uti cognoscam probationem vestram, quod
in omnibus obauditis mihi. Si cui autem donaveritis, et ego.
Nam et ego si quid donavi, donavi in persona Christi, ne frau-
deraur a Satana: quoniam non ignoraraus injectiones ejus." (2 Cor.
ii. 6-11.) ' In the immediately preceding sentence Clement quotes 2 Cor, i. 12 verba
tim "•<] yap xauyKjatc x.t.X," reading (as Lachmaiin did) ayto'TriTt for aicXoT-OTt of
the common text. It is unnecessary to multiply quotations. See four quotiitions
in t. 131 alone. That in the text is given as naming an Epistle by its number.
» Tertullian. 1 Cor. v. 5.

233
XVI.
GALATIANS. {compare sections i-iu. xi. xii.)
1. Barnadas.^
C. 19. 8. Kotvwvyasig iv ndatv np nXyaiov aov. (Gal. vi. 6.)
2. Clement of Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 49. 6. Aid rfjv aydnyv yv saysv nqdg fjfidg rd aifia ai
rnv sdco'/sv vnsq fjficov 'lyanvg Xqiardg b Kvqiog fjfidv iv dsXrj-
fian Qsnv, '/at rfjv adqxa vniq TJ;g aaq'/dg fjfiwv '/at rfjv xpvyyv
vniq rdv xpvydv fjfiwv. (Gal. i. 4.)
Second Epistle.
C.2.\. Isaiah liv. 1 quoted (see Gal. iv. 27).
0. 9. 7. 'Iig syofisv '/aiqdv rov ladfjvat, intddfisv savrovg rep
deqanevovrt Qecp, dvrtfiiadiav avrov diddvzeg. (Gal. vi. 10.)
C 17. 3. Hvxvdrsqov nqoasq'ydfisvot nsiqwfieda nqo'/dnretv
EV ralg ivroXalg rov Kvqiov. (Gal. i. 14.)
3. Ignatius. 1
4. Polycarp. ^
Philipp. c. 3. 2. Ol'/odofisladai sig rfjv dodslaav vfilv nianv,
^Ttg sort fiiqTyq ndvrcov fjficov. (Gal. iv. 26.)
> Barnabas. Compare as Echo i;. 21. 7, aMaTCXrjpoiiTe Kaom ^vtoXtiv (Gal.
vi. 2), » Clement, Compare as Echoes c, 2. 1, Tta3i;!J.aTa itpo o'tp^aX.utov (Gal, iii. 1);
c, 5. 2. OToXoi (Gal, ii, 9); ^. 56. 1, treatment of the erring (Gal vi. 1).
' Ignatius. Compare as Echoes : — Magnes, 8, 1, comp. Gal, v. 4. Trail, 10,
comp. Gal. ii. 21, Philadelph, 1, 1, comp. Gal, i. 1. Ibid, 9. 1, comp, Polyc.
1, 2, IlavTa? paOTa^e x.t,X. (see Gal, vi, 2),
1 Polycarp. Compare as Echoes: — Salutation, comp. Gal, vi, 16; t, 5, 3,
comp. Gal, v, 7 ; t, 6. 3, comp. Gal, iv. 18,

234 galatians.
Ibid. c. 5. 1. Elddreg ovv 'on Qedg oi fiv/ryqiterai. (Gal. vi. 7.)
Ibid. c. 6. 3. ZyXcorat neqt rd xaXdv. (Gal. iv. 18; comp.
Titus ii. 14.)
Lbid. c. 9. 2. HeneiOfiivovg 'on ovrot ndvreg oix elg xevov
sdqafiov, dXX' iv niarsi '/at 8t'/atoavvy. (Gal. ii. 2.)
Lbid. c. 12. 2. Qui credituri sunt in Dominura nostrura Jesura
Christum, et in ipsius patrera, "qui resuscitavit eura e mortuis."
(Gal. i. 1.)
5. Justin Martyr. ^
Bial. c. 95. p. 322 C. 'Ent'/ardqarog ydq el'qrjrat ndg og oi'/
ififiivei iv ndat rolg ysyqafifiivnig iv rip ^i^Xicp rov vdfiov rov
noiyaat aird. (Comp. Gal. iii. 10 as quoting Deut. xxvii. 26.)
Oratio ad Gentiles^ c. 5. livsade dg iyw, on xdyd rjfiyv
dg vfielg. . . . 'on '/addneq inaoiddg dyaddg ex cpwXsov i^sqnv-
aai notyaag cpvyadsvst dsivdv sqnsrdv, ovrwg b Xdyog i§ aircdv
riov T^g Ipvyfjg fivydv rd dsivd r-qg alad-yaswg dnsXavvst nddy
nqdrov inidv fiiav, 8t' fjg ndv dstvdv cpvsrat, eyd-qat, s'qeig,
tyXog, iqidetat, dvfiot, rd 'dfiota rovroig. (Gal. iv. 12; V. 20, 21.)
6. Letter to Diognetus.
C. 4c. 5. Td di naqs8qsvovrsg airnvg darqag xat asXfjvjj rfjv
naqaryqyatv twv firjvdv xat rdv fjfisqiov noisiadat. (Gal. iv. 10.)
7. Syriac and Old Latin Versions and Muratorian
Canon.
See before. Section I,
8. Tatian.^
Jerome, Comment, in Gal. LII. c. 6. (Vallars. Vol. VII. p. 526.)
1 Justin. Compare as Echoes in Justin's undoubted writings : Apol, I, 53,
p. 88 C, Isaiah liv. 1 (quoted as in Gal. iv, 27), see also 2 Clem. 2. 1 ; Dial.
cc, 89, 95, 96 (all referring to Deut. 21, 23 as in Gal, iii, 13); c, 119, xima
TOU 'Ajipadu 6ta ti^m oVoiav tcCotiv (Gal. iii. 7).
" Of disputed genuineness,
» Tatian. See Otto's Tatian p. 166.

TATIAN. ATHENAGORAS. IRENAEUS. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. 235
Tatianus, qui putativara Christi camera introducens, oranem con-
junctionem masculi ad foeminam immundam arbitratur, Encrati-
tarura vel acerriraus haeresiarches, tali . . . usus est arguraento:
Si qui seminal in carne, de carne serviturum declaravit, deo qui
dera per consensura, in temperantiae autem et fornicationi et
diabolo, dum consentire desinit.
9. Athenagoras.
Legatio, c. 16. 'Ent rd nrwyd xat dadevfj arotyela xara-
ninrofiev. (Gal. iv. 9.) 10. Irenaeus.
B. III. 6. 5. Et apostolus autem Paulus, dicens: "Si enim
his qui non erant Dii servistis, nunc cognoscentes Deum, immo
cogniti a Deo." (Gal. iv. 8, 9.)
B. III. 7. 2. Sed et in ea quae est ad Galatas, sic ait:
" Quid ergo lex factorum ? " Posita est, usque quo veniat seraen
cui proraissura est, disposita per angelos in raanu mediatoris.
(Gal. iii. 19.)
B. III. 16. 3. Et iterura in epistola, quae est ad Galatas,
ait (sc. Paulus): "Cura autera venit plenitude temporis, misit
Deus filiura suura, factum ex muliere, factum sub lege, ut eos
qui sub lege erant rediraeret, ut adoptionera percipiamus. " (Gal.
iv. 4, 5.)
B. V. 21. 1. Et hoc est semen, de quo ait apostolus in epi
stola quae est ad Galatas: "Legem factorura positam, donee ve-
niret seraen cui promissum est." Manifestius autera adhuc in
eadem ostendit epistola, sic dicens: "Cura autera venit plenitude
teraporis, raisit Deus filiura suura, factum de muliere." (Gal. iii.
19; iv. 4.)
11. Clement of Alexandria.
Strom. III. 16. p. 556. Jid '/at HavXog laXdraig sniariX-
Xcov, cpqat' Ts'/via finv, ovg 7cdXtv codivco, dxqtg ov fioqcpcody
Xqiardg iv vfiiv. (Gal. iv. 19.)

236

GALATIANS.

12. Acts of Paul and Thecla.
C. 40. "EXafinv rd Xovrqov HavXs ' b ydq aot awsqyyaag sig
TO siayyiXiov xdfiot awyqyyasv sig rd Xoiaaadai. (Gal. ii. 8.)
13. Tertullian.^
Adv. Marcion. V. 2. 1. Principalera adversus Judaisraura epi
stolara nos quoque confitemur, quae Galatas docet.
Be praescript. haeret. c. 6. Nec diutius de isto, si idem est
Paulus, qui et alibi haereses inter carnalia crimina numerat, scri
bens ad Galatas.

14. Clementine Homilies.^
Hom. XIX. 22. Alndfisvog rdv Xadv snt dfiaqriag vlovg
vEOfiyvidv rdv '/ard asX'fp'yv '/at aap^dnov ansxdXst. (Gal. iv. 10.)
" Tertullian. It is superfluous to quote at length Tertullian's numerous tes
timonies. 1 Clem, Hom, Compare also Clem. Hom. XVII, 19, avSe'aTiQxa; fjiot . . .
xaTEyvoiafA^vov ,u,e Xiyiit;, which is an evident Echo of Gal, ii, 11,

237
xvn.
EPHESIANS.^ {compare sections i-iil xl xii.)
1. Barnabas.
C. 6. 15. iVaog ydq dyiog, ddsXipoi fiov, np Kvqiqj rd '/aroix-
yrrjqiov fjfidv rfjg xaqdiag. (Eph. ii. 22.)
' The testimony of the early Church is unanimous in favour of the Pauline
origin of the Epistle. The only doubt has beeu as to its destination, Tertullian
charged Marcion and other heretics with the ascription of a false title to it — as
though addressed to the Laodiceans. Basil stated that in ancient copies it was not
ascribed to the Ephesians, but to the saints and faithful in Christ Jesus: 'AXXa
xa't Toi; 'EqjEototi; ^tcioteXXuv u; yvTioiu; YivUfJi^vot; tu ovti 5i' iniy^dcsziix; , ov
Ta; auTou; !6taS6vTu; o)vo,aaaEV, siTcto'v Toi; ayioi; toi; ouat xal tci-
OTOi; i'j XptoTM 'Iv)ao\i' outm xa\ ol irpo iffiuv itapaSeSuxaot , xol yiixei;
^v TOt; TCaXaiot; tuv avTtypacpoiv Euprfxafjiev (Basil, contra Eunomium), Of this
statement confirmation is found in the total absence of the words £v 'EcpEOO)
from the beginning of the Epistle in the Sinaitic MS (x) and their insertion by a
later hand in the Vatican (B), In the quotation from Origen in Cramer's Catena,
the words ^v 'Ecpe'au are perhaps omitted, though Origen elsewhere ascribes the
Epistle to Paul, (See extracts under 'Origen,')
Schleiermacher and De Wette, on internal grounds, objected to this Epistle,
Baur,' Hilgenfeld and others have included Colossians in the same condemnation,
Baur regards Ephesians as secondary to Colossians, but supposes them to have
been contemporaneous and connected. The ground on which he thus makes them
fall together, (just as Paley, Hor. Paul., c. VI. made them stand together) is
the nature of their resemblance to each other, which is not mere resemblance
but repetition. He finds also a mutual dependence; as in Eph, iv. 21 compared
with Coloss, iv, 16. He endeavours to prove that -they are not Pauline because
of the continued discourse upon the spirit-world, which is characteristic of Gnos
ticism, but unlike St Paul: the use of Gnostic terms and implied reference to
Gnostic doctrines : the acquaintance with Montanism : the state of the development
of the Church, &c. The special objections of Baur and his followers to Ephesians
arc based on its want of salutations and personal allusions (but see 2 Cor,, Gal.
and 1 & 2 Thess.) ; and passages in the Epistle which seem to intimate that Paul
himself had not been their teacher (e.g. i. 16; iii, 2, 3; iv, 21), The special ob
jections to Colossians are found in its development of Soteriology into Christology,
and that Christology an echo of Gnosticism, [On the resemblance between the
Epistles see Hilg,, Einl, p. 671: on the points of essential difference see Reuss,
Gesch. der heil. Schriften N. T. § 118. See also Gloag's Introd. to Pauline
Epistles, p. 328.]
After all has been said that can he said against the Epistles, their Pauline
origin is not disproved. The objections assume (1) that the seeds and intimations
of Gnosticism in St Paul's day were not sufficiently obvibus to a mind like his
to admit of his exposing them ; and (2) that the Gnostics of the second century
did not adopt the Apostle's expressions, and endeavour to weave them into their

238 ephesians.
2. Clement of Rome.
First Epistle.
C 46. 5. "Iva ri s'qsig, '/at dvfiot, '/at 8ixoaTaaLai, xat ayja-
fiara, ndXsfidg rs iv vfilv; 'rj oixt sva Qsdv s'xofiev, '/at sva Xqta
rdv; '/at sv nvsvfia rfjg ydqirog rd i'/yvdiv icp' yfidg, '/at fiia
xXyaig iv Xqianp; 'Iva ri diiX'/ofisv '/al dtaaniofiev rd fiiXy rov
Xqiarnv '/at araatdtnjiev nqdg rd adfia rd t'dtov, xat eig roaai-
TTJV dndvoiav iqxdfieda coare iniXadiadat fjfidg on fiiXy safiiv
dXXfjXwv; (Eph. iv. 4; comp. 1 Cor. xii.)
Second Epistle.
C. 14. 2. Oi'/ o'iofiat di vfidg ayvosiv 'on k/'/Xyaia tdaa
acofid ian Xqiarov {Xiysi ydq fj yqacpfj' 'Enoiyaev b Qsdg rdv
dvdqconov dqasv '/at dyXv rd dqaev iartv b Xqiardg, rd
¦dfjXv fj i'/'/Xyaia) x.r.X. (Eph. i. 23; iv. 12.)^
C. 19. 2. "Evia ydq novqqd nqdaaovreg oi yivcoO'/Ofiev did rfjv
Stxpvyiav xat aniariav rfjv ivovaav iv rolg aryd-eaiv yficov, xat
saxoriafisda T'qv Sidvotav vnd TtSv evdvfiidv rcov fiaraiwv. See
also 1 Clem. 36. 2. (Eph. iv. 7.)
3. Hermas.
Mand. X. 2. 5. ^Aqov dnd asavrov rfjv Xinyv '/at fifj dXl^e
rd Hvsvfia rd 'Ay inv rd iv aot xaTOixovv, ftynors svrev^qrat
'/ard aoi rip Qe^ '/at dnoarfj and anv. (Eph. iv. 30.)
systems. Those assumptions are unwarrantable. In regard to the first point, it
can be proved that, from the very necessity of the case, Gnosticism arose the
moment that Christianity came into contact with heathen philosophy, especially
with the combinations of Judaism and heathen philosophy which were prevalent
in such places as Alexandria and Antioch in the first Christian century. In re
gard to the second, it is easy to see how Valentinus adopted such words as TtXTrJ-
pu^xa, aotpta &c. , and constructed his system; but impossible to understand how
such epistles as those two could be written in the second century when the air
was full of the speculations of Valentinus and others like him. Though Baur
asserts that Valentinus' system was "too original" to be explained by what Ter
tullian said of it, the conclusion of most men is that Tertullian was right: Va-
lentinus . . -materiam ad scripturas excogitavit.
Since Ussher it has been often supposed that the Ephesian Epistle was orig
inally il circular letter, of which the copy to the Ephesians remains, although it
was the letter sent to Laodicea that the Colossians were to get. This theory accounts
for the statement of Basil, the practice of Marcion, and the evidence of S and B.
' 2 Clement. Some of the sentences which follow in the chapter seem to be
written in view of the Valentinian speculations.

HERMAS. IGNATIUS. POLYCARP. 239
Sim. IX. 13. 5. Omw '/at ol ntarsvaavreg rip Rvqiij) . . .
saovrai etg ev nvsvfia, sig 'iv adfia, xat fiia yqda TtSv Ifianafiiov
airdv. See also IX. 13. 7. and compare IX. 17. 4. (Eph. iv. 4.)
4. Ignatius.
EpJies. c. 12. 3. Hdqoddg sars rdv sig Qsdv dvaiqovfiivcov,
HavXnv avfifivarai, rov yytaofiivnv , rnv fisfiaqrvqyfiivnv, a^in-
fia'/aqlarov, nv ysvoird fioi vnd rd 'i'yvy svqsdfjvat, 'orav Qsnv
iniriyco, og iv nday sniaroXjj^ fivqfiovsvei vficov iv Xqianp lyaoij.
Magnes. cl. 1. iHi'a nqoasvyfj, fiia diyatg, etg vovg, fiia
iXnig, iv dydny, iv rjj yaqd ry dfidftcp, o effTtv 'iqaovg Xqiardg,
ov dfisivnv nidiv sartv. (Eph. iv. 3-6.)
Philad. c. 2. 1. Ti'/va ovv cpcordg dXydsiag, cpsvysrs rdv
fisqiofinv xat rdg 8i8aa'/aXiag. (Eph. v. 8; comp. John xii. 26;
1 Thess. V. 5.)
Ad Polyc. c. 5. 1. 'Ofinicog xat rolg d8EXcpolg fiov naqdyysXXe
iv dvdfiart 'lyaov Xqtarov, dyandv rag avfi^iovg dg 6 Kiqiog
rfjv i'/'/Xyaiav. (Eph. v. 25, 29.) ^
5. Polycarp.
Philipp. c. 1. 3. Elddreg 'dn ydqirt sars aeawofiivot, oi'/ i^
s'qycov, dXXd dsXfjfiazi Qsov did 'iqaov Xqiarnv. (Eph. ii. 8, 9.)
Ibid. c. 12. 1. Confide 1 enim vos bene exercitatos esse in sa
cris literis, et nihil vos latet: mihi autera non est concessura.
• Ignatius. 'Ev nda-t] iKia-zoX-i] , usually translated "in the whole Epistle."
Comp. Ttaoa o!xoSop.T) Eph, ii, 21, Others translate: "in all his Epistles,"
2 Echoes: — Ad Eph. 1, ix£.-^i^v. . . . nX-qpoitxaTi (Eph. i. 19, iv. 13). Ibid,
4, 2, ijieXti (Eph, v. 30); Ibid, 9, 1, XOoi vaou (Eph. ii, 22); Ad Polyc, 6. 2.
o'^nXa (Eph, vi, 11),
• Polycarp, This is only found in the Latin, As it stands it is a conjunction
of a Psalm and of the Epistle as being parts of "these scriptures" (of which lie
has been speaking). Doubt has been thrown upon the genuineness of this, on the
ground that the Latin version has inserted " et quod dictum est" in c. 2, between
two passages of the New Testament, while the Greek has only xa(. But in c, 2,
the first quotation is introduced with tlniEv o Ku'pio; SlSaaxuv, which is trans
lated in the Latin " quod domi-nus docens dixit. " To insert " et quod dictum est "
before the second quotation in that case as a translation of xai is therefore to
make no real change on the original; while to introduce " ut Jds scripturis dictum
est" in the case of c, 12 would have been a serious change, Dr Davidson (Int.
to N, T, I. 382, 21'! Ed,) incorrectly states that in c, 2 " Tho translator has in
troduced a word of Jesus's with ' as it is written,'

240 EPHESIANS.
Modo, ut his scripturis dictum est, " Irascimini, et nolite pec-
care," et "Sol non oceidat super iracundiam vestram." (Ps. iv. 4;
Eph. iv. 26.)
6. Muratorian Canon, Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
See before, Section I.
7. Irenaeus.
B. V. 2. 3. Kadwg b fia'/dqiog HavXog cpyaiv iv rfj nqdg
'Ecpsaiovg iniarnXfj' on fiiXy iafiiv rnv adfiarog, ex T^g aaq'/dg
airov, '/at ix rdv daricov airov. (Eph. V. 30.)
B. V. 14. 3. Quemadmodum Apostolus Ephesiis ait : " In quo
habuimus redemptionem per sanguinem ejus, reraissionem pecca
torum." Et rursus eisdem: "Vos, inquit, qui aliquando eratis
longe, facti estis juxta, in sanguine Christi." Et iterum: "Ini
mici tias in carne sua, legem praecep torum decretis evacuans."
(Eph. i. 7; ii. 11-15.) 8. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. 1. 7. p. 74. Aid rfjv Tvq>Xioaiv rfjg xpvxqg '/at
ndqcoaiv rfjg '/aqdiag aov. See also IL 35. p. HI. (Eph. iv. 18.)
Lbid. IL 16. p. 95. Tfj de nifinry fjfiiqa rd ex twv v8drcov
iysvrjdq tcoa' 8t' dv '/at sv rovroig 8si'/vvrat fj nnXvnoi-ztXng
aocpia rov Qeov. See also I. 6. p. 73. (Eph. iii. 10.)
Ihid. II. 28. p. 104. 'Ewg '/at rov 8evqo ivsqydv iv rolg iv-
d-ovaiatofiivoig vn' airov dvdqwnotg. (Eph. ii. 2.)
9. Clement of Alexandria.
Paedag. I. 5. p. 108. ^aipiarara de 'Ecpsainig yqdcpcov dns-
¦/dXvxpe rd tyrnvfievov, wdi nwg Xiywv " Miyqt /aravr yaw fisv ol
ndvrsg sig rfjv evdryra T^g niarswg '/at rfjg iniyvdaswg rov
Qeov etg avd^a riXsinv, sig fiirqnv fjXi'/iag rov nXyqdfiarog rov
Xqiarov' 'iva fiy/in wfiev vynioi x.r.X." (Eph. iv. 13, 14.)
Strom. LV. 8. p. 592. Aid xat iv rfj nqdg 'Ecpsaiovg yqdcpet'
vnoraaadfievnt dXX-qXotg iv cpd^ii) Qeov'/.r.X. (Eph.v.21.)

tertullian. CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. ORIGEN. 241

10. Tertullian. ^
Adv. Marcion. V. 11. Praetereo hic et de alia epistola, quara
nos ad Ephesios praescriptara haberaus, haeretici vero ad Lao
dicenos. Ibid. V. 17. Ecclesiae quidem veritate epistolam istam ad
Ephesios haberaus emissam, non ad Laodicenos, sed Marcion ei
titulum ahquando interpolare gestiit, quasi et in isto dihgentis-
simus explorator. Nihil autem de titulis interest, cura ad oranes
Apostolus scripserit, dura ad quosdam.
11. Clementine Homilies.
Hom. XIX. 2. Kat ndXtv fiy dors nqdcpaaiv rip novqqcp.
(Eph. iv. 27.) 12. Origen.
Hsqt dqycov IIL C. V. § 4. p. 149. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 328.)
Sed et Apostolus in epistola ad Ephesios eodem serraone usus est
cura ait : " Qui elegit nos ante mundi constitutionem." (Eph. i. 4.)
Cramer's Catena, VL. 102. 'Hqiyivyg 8i cpyat, int fidvwv 'Eg)s-
ff/wv eii^o^uev xeifisvov rd "rolg dyioig rolg ovat" '/at tyi^ofjfisv
sl fifj naqiXxst nqoO'/sifisvov rd "rolg dyiotg rolg ovat" ri dv
varat ayfiaiveiv.^ (Eph. i. 1.)
13. Epiphanius.
Haeres. 42. c. 9. p. 310. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 708.) "Eyei de (sc.
Mapxt'wv) xat ryg nqdg Aaodtxiag Xeyofiivrjg fiiqy.
Lbid. Schol. p. 374. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 811.) £tg Kvqtog, fiia
niang, tv §dnnafia, etg Xqiardg, sig Qsdg xat Harfjq ndvrwv
b snt ndvrcov '/at did ndvrwv '/at iv ndatv. (Eph. iv. 5, 6.)
' Tertullian, These extracts show that in Tertullian's opinion the Epistle
was addressed to the Ephesians ; and that it was also in Marcion's Canon, but
under another name, Valentinus also referred to it as Scripture,
' Origen here seems to omit the words £v 'E^^au, but in view of the pre
vious quotation nothing can be founded upon the omission. See before, Ephe
sians: note 1. See also Cont, Cels, III. 20. 16

242 EPHESIANS.
Befut. 2vva8dvTcog fiiv tjj nqdg 'Ecpsaiovg, w Maq'/iwv, '/at rav-
rag rdg '/ard aoij fiaqrvqiag dnd rfjg Xeyofiivqg nqdg Aaodtxiag
avvfjyaysg '/ard anv fiaqrvqiag.^
14. Jerome.
Ln Epist. ad Ephes. praef at. (Vallars. Vol. VII. p. 540.) Scri
bebat (sc. Paulus) ad Ephesios. . . . Hoc ipsum scriptura refert
quomodo Paulus ad Ephesios sermocinetur.
Ad Ephes. L. c. 1. (Ibid. p. 545.) Quidam curiosius, quam
necesse, putant ex eo, quodMosi dictum sit: Haec dices filiis
Lsrael, qui est, misit me, etiara eos, qui Ephesi sunt sancti et
fideles, essentiae vocabulo nuncupates; ut quoraodo a sancto sancti,
a justo justi, a sapiente sapientcs: ita ab eo qui est, hi "qui
sunt" appellentur. . . . Alii vero dmplicitcr, non ad "eos qui
sunt," sed "qui Ephesi" sancti et fideles "sunt," scriptum arbi-
trantur. ' Epiphanius. The passage immediately preceding contains a list of the books
of Marcion's Canon: Galatians, Corinthians (1 and 2), Romans, Thessalonians (1
and 2), Ephesians, Philemon, Philippians. Then come the words ; He has also some
portums of the Epistle called " To the Laodiceans. " Epiphanius appears to have
become confused as to Marcion's 'Laodiceans,' which he supposed to be diflerent
from the Epistle to the Ephesians. The second quotation in our text shows that
Marcion was really quoting from ' Ephesians ' when Epiphanius supposed him to
draw from some distinct source called Laodiceans. And accordingly he apos
trophizes Marcion in order to tell him that those Laodicean words are also in
the canonical Ephesians!

243

XVIIL
PHILIPPIANS.
[compare sections i-iu, xi, xii.)
1. Clement of Rome.
First Epistle.
C. 16. 1. Taneivocpqnvovvrwv ydq iartv b Xqiardg, oi-/ inai-
qofiivwv int rd noifiviov airnv. Td axfjnrqov T^g fieyaXcoavvijg
rov Qeov, b Kvqiog Xqiardg 'iqaovg, oi'/ yXdsv sv '/dfincji dXa-
tovsiag oidi vnsqqcpaviag, '/ainsq dvvdfievng' dXXd ranetvncpqn-
viov, '/adcog rd nvevfia rd 'dyinv neqt avrnv iXdXyaev. Oqat
ydq' Kvqie rig iniarevae rfj d'/nfj fjfidv, /.r.X. (Isa. liii. 1, &c.)
'Oqdre, dvdqeg dyanrjznl, rig b vnnyqafifidg b dedofiivog fjfilv' sl
ydq b Kvqiog o'v-ziog iransivocpqdvqasv, ri notyaofisv fjfieig nl vnd
rdv tvydv T^g ydqirog avrnv dt' avrov iXddvrsg; (Phil. ii. 5, t&c.)'
Seeond Epistle.
C. 18. 2. ^nnv8dtw rfjv 8i'/aioavvyv 8id/siv, ojrtug la'yvaco
¦/dv iyyvg airfjg ysviadai, cpo^ovfievog rqv '/qiaiv rfjv fiiXXovaav.
(Phil. iii. 12; 1 Tim. vi. 11.) 2. Ignatius.
Philad. c. 8. 2.* Haqa'/aXd de vfidg, fiy8iv '/az' iqiUeiav
nqdaaeiv, uXXd '/ard yqiarofiadiav. (Phil. ii. 3.)^
Smyrn. c. 11. 3. TiXeiot 'dvreg, riXsta xat cpqovslrs. (Phil.
iii. 15.) ' Clement, Compare as echoes: C, 2. 5. eiXixpivei; (Phil, i. 10); c. 5, 5.
ppopefov (Phil, iii, 14); c. 7, 1. ayuv (Phil, i, 30); c. 19. 1, 2. pressing on to
the mark (cjxotio'v) (Phil, iii, 14); c, 21, 1. a'?((ii; auTou itoXaeuo'tJievoi (Phil, i, 27);
(Compare also Polyc, 5. 2,)
> Ignatius, Compare as echoes: Rom. 2. 2, aitovSlS^ijvai (Phil, ii. 17),
Ibid, 6, xaXdv (iOi anoSaveiv, x.t,X. (Phil, i. 21).
2 Compare c, 1. 1. xaTa xsvo8o|£av. 16*

244 PHILIPPIANS.

3. Polycarp.^
Philipp. c. 2. 1, 'iit vnsrdyy rd ndvra snovqdvia xat sni-
ysia' Ip ndaa nvofj Xarqevet. (Phil. ii. 10; 1 Cor. xv. 28.)
Ibid. c. 3. 1. Tavra, d8sXcpnt, oi'/ ifiavnp sntrqixpag yqdcpw
Vfilv nsqt ryg 8txatoaivyg' dXX' inst vfislg nqosnsXa'/riaaads
fis. O'vrs ydq syd, ovrs dXXog bfioiog ifiot 8vvarat '/ara'/oKov-
dfjaai TJJ aocpia rov jia'/aqiov '/at ivdd^ov HavXov, og ysvdfisvog
iv Vfiiv '/ard nqoawnov rdv rdrs dvdqdncov sdida^sv d'/qifidg
'/at ^s^aicog rdv nsqt dXydsiag Xdyov og 'xat dndv vfilv eyqaxpev
intaroXdg,^ elg ag sdv eyxinrrjze,^ dvvydrjaeade ol'/o8ofieladat
elg TIJV 8odelaav vfiiv nianv rjng iart jiyryq ndvrcov fjfidv.
Ibid. c. 9. 2. Henetafiivovg, on ovrot ndvreg oi'/ sig '/svdv
s8qafiov, aXX iv n'larst xai 8i'/aioa'vvy, '/at on sig rdv dcpeiXd
fievov avroig rdnov elat naqd np Kvqiqr, cp '/at awinadov. (Phil.
ii. 16, 17.)
Ibid. c. 11. 3. Ego autera nihil tale sensi in vobis, vel audivi,
in quibus laboravit beatus Paulus ; qui estis laudati in principio
epistolae ejus. De Vobis etenim gloriatur in omnibus ecclesiis,
quae Deum solae tunc cognoverant: nos autera nondura novera-
raus. (Thess. i. 4; Phil. i. 5.)
4. Martyrdom of Polycarp.
C. 1. 2. Heqiifieve ydq [6 HoXv'/aqnog], 'iva naqaSody, dg
'/at 6 Kvqiog, %va fiifiyrat xat fjfielg avrov yevwfieda, fiy fidvov
a'/onovvreg rd xad' savrovg, dXXd '/at rd '/ard rovg nsXag.
(Phil. ii. 4.)
5. Justin Martyr.
Be Besurrect. c. 7. 'E^yg 8s Xs'/rsov nqdg rovg drtfidtovrag
> Polycarp, Compare as echoes: C, I. 1. am^fap-fft ^H'^a.Xaz (Phil, iv, 10);
0, 10. 1. diligentes invicem &c. (Phil, ii, 2-5); c, 12. 3, inimicis crucis (Phil. iii.
18); c. 5. 2, (Phil, i, 27).
^ Is this a reference to more than one Epistle? In the fourth extract the
Latin gives a singular form Epistola. Either the singular or the plural may de
note a single Epistle. See this abundantly proved by Lightfoot, Philippians,
p, 138, 3 Compare T:apaxuitTii) di (John xx, 11; James i. 25 ; 1 Pet. i. 12).

LETTER TO DIOGNETUS. IRENAEUS. THEOPHILUS. 245
rfjv adq'/a '/at cpdaxovrag fiy d^iav eivai ryg dvaardaecog fiydi
rfjg oiqavinv noXirsiag. (Phil. iii. 20.)
C. 9. Kadcog s'iqyxev iv oiqavip Tjyv '/aroi'/rjaiv vndqysiv.
(Phil. iii. 20 and, raore clearly, John xiv. 2, 3.)^
6. Letter to Diognetus.^
C. 5. 9. Ent yyg dtarqi^ovatv, dXX' iv oiqavip noXirsvnvrai.
(Phil. iii. 20.)

7. Letter of Church of Vienne and Lyons.
Eus. H. E. V. 3. Ol xat int roaoirov tyXcorat '/at fiifiyrat
Xqiarov iyivovro, og iv fioqcpjj Qsov vndqycov ovx dqnay~
fidv fjyqaaro rd eivat laa Qecp. (Phil. ii. 6.)

8. Irenaeus.
B. IV. 8. 4. Quoniara igitur cura simplicitate ecclesia offert,
juste munus ejus .purum sacrificium apud Deum deputatum est.
Quemadraodura et Paulus Philippensibus ait: "Eepletus sura ac-
ceptis ab Epaphrodito, quae a vobis raissa sunt, odorem suavi-
tatis, hostiara acceptabilem, placentem Deo." (Phil. iv. 18.)
B. V. 13. 3. De qua resurrectione apostolus in ea quae est,
ad Phihppenses, ait: "Conformatus morti ejus, si quo raodo oc-
currara ad resurrectionera quae est a mortuis." (Phil. iii. 10, 11.)
Ibid. Et rursus ad Philippenses ait: "Nostra autem conver-
satio in coelis est; unde et Salvatorem exspectamus Dominura
Jesura, qui transfigurabit corpus hurailitatis nostrae conforrae
corpori gloriae suae, ita ut possit secundura operationera virtutis
suae." (Phil. iii. 20, &c.)
9. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. LI. 17. Td sniyeia cpqovovatv. (Phil. iii. 19.)
1 Justin has some echoes: Dial, c, 3. p. 229 C (PhU, iii, 3)(?); Dial. c. 33.
p, 251 B, TOTcetvo;, x.t.X, (Phil, ii, 8, 9); and (perhaps the most certa,in) Dial.
c, 134, p, 364 C, Tinv (i^XPt OTaupoO 8ouXe£av (Phil. ii. 7, 8).
' Diognetus. Compare as echo : C, 2. 1 with Phil, ii, 10.

246 PHILIPPIANS.
Ibid. 2. 36. "Ozt fiiv ovv ravra dXydfj '/at cocpsXtfia xai
di'/aia '/at nqoacpiXfj ndaiv avdqwnoig rvyydvsi, dfjXdv iart.
(Phil. iv. 8.)
Jerome, Ad Algas. quaest. 6. (Vallars. Vol. I. p. 860.) The
ophilus Antiochenae ecclesiae septiraus post Petrura apostolum
episcopus, qui quatuor evangelistarum in unum opus dicta com
pingens, ingenii sui nobis monumenta diraisit, haec super hac
parabola in suis commentariis est locutus. . . . Dixitque (Paulus)
in corde suo : Quid faciam ? . . . Coepitque eos qui prius versa-
bantur in lege, et sic in Christum crediderunt, ne arbitrarentur
se in lege justificandos, docere legem abolitam, prophetas prae-
teriisse, et quae antea pro lucre fuerant, reputari in stercora.
(Phil. iii. 8.)
10. Clement of Alexandria.
Paedag. I. 6. 52. p. 129. Airov bfioXoyovvrog rov HavXov
nsqt savrov' oi'y 'ort 'ydy sXa^ov, 'fj 'ydy rsrsXsicofiaf
8 id'/ CO 8i sl '/at '/araXd^w, '/.r.X. (Phil. iii. 12, &C.)
Strom. LV. 13. 92. p. 604. El de anEv8sTat int rfj dvaia
xat ZJJ Xsirovqyia rfjg niarBwg yaiqwv -/at avyyatqwv,
nqdg ovg b Xdyog no 'AnnaznXiii, rovg OiXinnya'tovg avfifisrv-
ynvg T^g ydqtrog '/aXdv, nwg airovg avfixpvxnvg Xiysi.
(Phil, ii.) 11. Tertullian.
Be resurrect, carn. c. 23. Ad quam (sc. spem resurrectionis)
pendens et ipse quura Philippensibus scribit: "si qua," inquit,
"concurrani in resurrectionera, quae est a mortuis. Non quia
jam accepi aut consummatus sum." (Phil. iii. 11, 12.)
Ibid. c. 47. Quod elisum est suscitans, et quidem de terra
iu coelum, ubi nostrum niunicipatum Philippenses quoque ab
Apostolo discunt: "Unde et salutificatorcm nostrum exspectamus
Jesum Christura, qui transfigurabit corpus nostrae hurailitatis,
conforraale corpori gloriae suae." Sine dubio post resurrectionera,
quia nec ipse Christus glorificatus est ante passionem. (Phil.
iii. 21.)

247

XIX.
COLOSSIANS.^
(OOMPASE SECTIONS I-III, XI, XII.)
' The Epistle to the Colossians contains many of the same words and
phrases as that to the Ephesians, And yet the purpose of this is quite distinct
from that of the other — being definitely and polemically directed against certain
false teachers who were misleading the Colossian church ; whereas the other Epistle
deals with doctrines more generally and comprehensively. Moreover, the real sub
ject of the Epistle is not the same in each case; the argument of Eph, i, and ii,
is not in the Colossian Epistle at all. In other cases the same words are used,
but with a different reference (comp, Eph. iv. 16 with Col. ii. 19). It is in ex
pressions rather than in purpose that the points of resemblance and the instances
of repetition are found (see Reuss: Les Epitres Pauliniennes, II. 149). The gen
uineness of Colossians was not disputed until this century, and the objections
rest on subjective grounds. First of all (as is stated in the notes on Ephesians),
the close correspondence between this Epistle and that to Ephesus is said to
awaken suspicion that one at least is a forgery. While some for this cause put
away Ephesians, others discard both. Then further, the words in the Epistles
which are familiar in Gnostic writings, and not only familiar but keynotes of
such systems as that of Valentinus, are regarded as proof that they originated
while those systems were in vogue i.e., in the second century (see notes on
Ephesians). The polemical references in Colossians are next compared with the
doctrines of Ebionitism: and the conclusion is that in regard to circumcision
(ii, 11), peculiarities of diet (ii. 21), and angel-worship (ii. 21), the writer was de
nouncing Ebionites. In order to take the ground away from the whole system, he
proclaims the doctrine of the Person of Christ against the well-known Ebionite
theories that .Jesus was a creature, created not begotten of God, as a chief angel
might be. All this might be admitted in so far as regards Ebionitism : but it
does not give a date in the second century, for the principles of Ebionitism must
have been at work from the time when Jews adopted Christianity without fully
accepting the Gospel doctrine of Christ's Personal Deity. Baur's argument for a
date in the second century really rests upon the occurrence of its words and
phrases in Gnostic systems. Besides what was said in the notes to Ephesians as
to the greater probability of a Gnostic quoting and twisting Pauline words, than
of a forger in Paul's name adopting the terminology of a Gnostic with whom he
did not wisb to be supposed to agree, we may here draw attention to the ac
tual use of the words in question by Valentinus (whom Baur cites) and by the
author of Colossians respectively. In the Valentinian system 7tXifipufj.a , ao<pia,
irtoTt;, OTaupo';, and so on, are used with technical meanings, which are not ap
plicable in any one case in the Epistles, unless perhaps that the varied fortunes
of aotpia iu tjie Valentinian fable may be supposed to correspond to the Pauline
TCoXuTCotxiXo; ao(p£a of Ephesians iii, 10, or that the legend of the TtXifpco.aa of
Valentinian aeons contributing to make up the Saviour may be imagined to re
semble Col, i, 19; ii. 9. But even when tbe resemblance is admitted, the grotesque
story of the Gnostic (however metaphorically interpreted) is so evidently a per
version of the Scripture teaching, that to imagine it the original and the Colos
sian words the imitation is to go beyond all probability.
On the relative priority of the two closely related Epistles critical opinion
widely varies. If that to Colossians was actually first written, the reference (Col.
iv. 16) to the Epistle from Laodicea (which was probably that we know as

248 COLOSSIANS.
1. Barnabas. '^
C. 12. 7. "Eyeig ndXtv '/at sv rovroig t))v do^av TOti 'lyaov,
'ort EV airip ndvra '/at etg avrdv. (Col. i. 16.)
2. Clement of Rome.^
First Epistle.
3. Ignatius.^
4. Polycarp. ^
5. Justin Martyr.^
Bial. c. 84. p. 310 B. 'AXX' 'dnsq iartv dXydwg ayfislov xat
niardv np ysvst riov dvdqdnwv sfisXXs yivsadat, rovriart did
naqdevtxfjg ffqrqag rdv nqwrdro'/nv nov ndvrwv notyjtdrwv aaq-
'/onoiydivra dXyddg naidiov ysviadai. (Col. i. 15.)
Ibid. C. 85. p. 311 B. Kurd ydq rov dvdfiarog airov roirov
rov vlov rov Qsov '/at nqwrnrd'/ov ndayg '/riascog, xai did naq
divov yevvrjdivrog . . . ndv daifidviov s^oq'/itdfisvov vixdrai '/at
vnordaaerat. (Col. i. 15.)
Ibid. c. 100. p. 326 B. Fvovreg airdv nqwrdroxov fiiv roZ
' Ephesians ') is not so easily explained, as it is if Paul knew that when he wrote
to Colossians the letter which, when they got theirs, was, or soon would be, in
Laodicea, and so within their reach, was already written. But the point is too
easily debated on either side to be of great clearness,
> Barnabas, Compare as Echoes : C. 14. 5. XuTpucja|ievo; ix tou oxotou;
(Col. i. 13); c. 10. 9. xot' ^TCiSupitav ttJ; oapxo; (Col. ii, 23); and perhaps c. 21. 1
(comp. Col. ii, 6.)
> Clement, Compare as echoes: C, 21, 1, (Col, i. 10); c, 27. 4, (Col, i. 17);
c, 50, 1. (Col. iii. 14), All of these echoes are faint and doubtful.
' Ignatius. Compare as echoes: Eph. 2, 1. ouvSoOXou (Col. i, 7); c, 10, 2,
ISpaioi Tij) TctoTSi (Col, i, 23) ; v. 18. 2. xaT ofxovo|Ji£av 6eoO (Col. i, 25). Magnes.
9. 1. |jLT)x^Tt oappaTfJovTES, x.T,X. (Col, ii. 16, 17). '
• Polycarp. Compare as echoes: C, 1, 2. (Col, ii. 7); c. 11. 2. (Col. iii. 5);
c. 12, 3, (Col. i, 28).
• Justin, The following passages seem to intimate with sufficient clearness
that Justin was acquainted with Paul's writings. It is not a competent argument
on the other side to say that "there is a presumption against Justin's caring to
know any of the Apostle's writings," Tet this is all that Dr Davidson (who
admits that "Paul's letter to the Colossians . . . existed long before") can ad
vance (Int. to N. T. I, 175).

TATLAN. IRENAEUS. THEOPHILUS. 249
Qsov '/at nqd ndvrcov twv '/nofidrwv. Corap. Dial. c. 125.
p. 354 C. (Col. i. 15.)
Ibid. c. 138. p. 367 B. '0 ydq Xqiardg, nqwrdro'/og nd
ayg XTi'ffewg wv. (Col. i. 15.)
6. Tatian.
Orat. ad Graecos, c. 5. p. 145 A. '0 Si Xdyog, oi xard xsvov
ycoqyaag, s'qyov nqwrdroxov rov narqdg yivsrat. (Col. i. 15.)
7. Muratorian Canon, Syriac and Old Latin Versions. ^
(See before, pp, 1. 2,)
7. Irenaeus.
B. LL. 22. 4. Sic et senior in senioribus, ut sit perfectus raa-
gister in oranibus, non solum secundum' expositionera veritatis,
sed et secundura aetatem, sanctificans siraul et seniores, exeraphim
ipsis quoque fiens; deinde et usque ad mortem pervenit, ut sit
primogenitus ex mortuis ipse primatum tenens in omnibus, prin
ceps vitae, prior omnium et praecedens oranes. (Col. i. 18.)
B. LII. 14. 1. Et iterura in ea epistola quae est ad Colos
senses, ait: "Salutat vos Lucas raedicus dilectus." (Col. iv. 14.)
B. V. 14. 2. Et propter hoc apostolus in ea epistola quae
est ad Colossenses, ait: "Et vos cura essetis aliquando alienati,
et inimici cogitationi ejus^ in operibus raahs, nunc autera recon-
ciliati in corpore carnis ejus, per raortera ejus, exhibere vos
sanctos et castos et sine criraine in conspectu ejus." (Col. i.
21, 22.)
8. Theophilus.^
Ad Autolyc. II. c. 22. p. 100 B. Hqd ydq rt yivsadat rov
rov siys avfi^ovXov, savrov vovv xat cpqdvyatv 'dvra. 'Onirzs ds
ydiXyasv 6 ©eog notyaat 'oaa E[iovXevaaro, rnvrov rdv Xdyov iyiv-
' Colossians was in Marcion's Canon.
' Irenaeus. Another reading is inimici cogitationis ejus.
' Theophilus. Comp. as shorter quotation or echo: Theoph. 2. 17, p. 96,
xd avw tppovoOvTs; (Col. iii. 2).

250 COLOSSIANS.
vyae nqocpoqixov, nqwrdro'/ov ndayg XTi'ffewg, oi '/evwdeig
avrdg rov Xdyov, dXXd Xdyov yevvyaag /at np Xdyij) airov did
navrdg bfiiXdv. (Col. i. 15-17.)
9. Clement of Alexandria.
Strom. I. 15. p. 325. Kav rfj nqdg KoXaaaaelg intaroXjj
" vovderovvreg" yqdcpet "ndvra dvdqconov '/at 8i8da'/nvreg iv
nday ancpict, iva naqaarfjacofiev ndvra dvdqwnov riXeiov iv
Xqiaripi." (Col. L 28.)
Ibid. VI. 8. p. 771. 'ilaavnog dqa '/at rolg i^ 'EXXyvwv snt-
arqicpovat KoXoaaasvat' "§XinsTs fifj rig vfidg sarat b avXayco-
ydv 8id rfjg ftXoaocpiag,'''' '/.r.X. (Col. ii. 8.)
10. Tertullian.^
Be praescript. haeret. c. 7. A quibus nos apostolus refrenuns
norainatira philosophiara contestatur caveri oportere, scribens ad
Colossenses: "Videte, ne qui sit circumveniens vos per philoso
phiara et inanera seductionem, secundum traditionera horainum
praeter providentiam Spiritus Sancti." (Col. ii. 8.)
Be resurrect, carnis c. 23. Docet quidem Apostolus, Colos-
sensibus scribens, mortuos fuisse nos ahquando alienates et ini
micos sensus Domini, quura in operibus pessirais agebaraus, de
hinc consepultos Christo in baptismate, et conresuscitatos in eo
per fidem efficaciae Dei, qui ilium suscitarit e raortuis. "Et vos
cura raortui essetis in delictis et praeputatione carnis vestrae,
vivificavit cura eo, donatis vobis omnibus dehctis." (Col. ii. 13.)
• The quotations of Tertullian are very numerous.

251 t
XX.
FIRST THESSALONIANS.^
{compare sections i-iii, xi, xii.)
1. Barnabas.^
2. Clement of Rome.^
Ep. I. 38. 1. 2wtiadio ovv fjfidv bXov rd adfia iv Xqianp
'lyaov. (1 Thess. v. 23.)
Ibid. c. 38. 4. 'OcpsiXofiev xard ndvra evxaqiarelv aircp.
(1 Thess. V. 18.) 3. Ignatius. 1
Eph. 10. 1. Kat vniq rdv dXXcov de dvdqdnwv d8taXsi-
nrcog nqoaevyeade. (1 Thess. v. 17.)
Philad. 2. 1. Ti'/va ovv cpwvdg dXydeiag, cpsvysrs rdv pteqi-
afidv '/at rdg '/a'/odidaaxaXiag. (1 Thess. v. 5.)
Ad Polyc. 1. 3. Hqoaevyalg axdXate ddiaXeinroig. (1 Thess.
V. 17.) 4. Polycarp. 1
5. Syriac, Old Latin, and Muratorian Canon.
See before,*
' Baur was the first to doubt the authenticity of this Epistle, He argues
that its language and its apocalyptic ideas are not Pauline, His views have not
been widely adopted, Hilgenfeld refutes his arguments, as also does Davidson.
See an excellent statement of the case regarding the two Epistles to Thessalonica in
Reuss, Gesch, § 78-82. See Paley's Sorae Paidi-nae for some suggestive remarks,
' Barnabas has the following echoes : C, 4, 13, warning against sloth and
sleep (1 Thess. v. 6, &c.); c, 21. 6, i£oSi5axToi (1 Thess. iv, 9).
' Clement of Rome, Compare as echoes: 1 Clem. c. 35, 5, tcioti; TCpo; tov
0£o'v (comp. 1 Thess. i. 8), and c, 44. 6, a|XE'(/.TtTu; T£Ti|JLif)n^vir); XeiTOupyia; (comp.
1 Thess, V. 23),
» Ignatius, Compare as echo: Ad Polyc. 6. 2 (comp, 1 Thess, v, 8),
1 Polycarp. Compare as echoes: Phil, 2, 2 (comp. 1 Thess, v, 22); c. 4, 3
(comp, 1 Thess, v, 17),
' It was also in Marcion's Canon,

252

FIRST THESSALONIANS.

6. Irenaeus.
B. F. 6. 1. Et propter hoc apostolus seipsum exponens, ex-
planavit perfectum et spiritualem salutis hominem, in prima
epistola ad Thessalonicenses dicens sic: "Deus autem pacis
sanctificet vos perfectos, et integer vester spiritus, et anima, et
corpus sine querela in adventum Domini Jesu Christi servetur."
(1 Thess. V. 23.)
L. V. 30. 2. Hoc et apostolus ait: "Cura dixerint, pax, et
munitio, tunc subitaneus illis superveniet interitus." (1 Thess. v. 3.)
7. Clement of Alexandria. *
Paedag. 5. 19. p. 109. Tovrd rot aacpearara 6 jia'/dqiog
HavXog vneayft-rjvaro, elndv Avvdfisvot sv ^aqei eivat cog
Xqiarov anoaroXoi, sysvydyfiev yntot sv fiiacji vfidv,
wg av rqocpdg ddXny rd savryg rixva. (1 Thess. ii. 7.)
Strom. L. 9. 53. p. 347. Hdvra $i doxtfidtere, 6 dnd
aroXog cpyat, xat rd xaXdv xariyers. (1 Thess. v. 21.)
8. Tertullian. ^
Be resurrect, ca/rn. c. 24. Quae haec tempora, cura Thessa
lonicensibus disce. Legiraus enira: "Quahter conversi sitis ab
idolis ad serviendura vivo et vero Deo, et ad exspectandura e
coelis filiura ejus, quera suscitavit ex raortuis, Jesum." (1 Thess.
i. 9, 10.)
Ibid. Et ideo majestas Spiritus Sancti perspicax ejusmodi
sensuura, et in ipsa ad Thessalonicenses epistola suggerit: "De
temporibus autem et temporum spatiis, fratres, non est neeessitas
scribendi vobis. Ipsi enira certissime scitis, quod dies Doraini,
quasi fur nocte, ita adveniet etc." (1 Thess. v. 1, &c.)
> Clement of Alexandria. About ten other passages could be cited from
Clement to the same effect. He calls it o" Ssio; aito'oToXo;, Strom. IV, 87. p. 602, &c.
' Tertullian has more than thirty citations from this Epistle.

253
XXL
SECOND THESSALONIANS.^
{compare sections l-iii, xi, xii.)
1. Barnabas.
C. 15. 5. 'Ozav iXdwv 6 vldg. airov '/araqyijasi rdv '/aiqdv
uov dvd fiov '/at xqivsl rovg das^slg. (2 Thess. ii. 3.)

2. Polycarp.
Philipp. 11. 3. Ego autem nihil tale sensi in vobis, vel
audivi, in quibus laboravit beatus Paulus, qui estis in principio
epistolae ejus. "De vobis etenim gloriatur in omnibus ecclesiis,"
quae Deura tunc solae cognoverant. (2 Thess. i. 4.) ^
C. 114. Sobrii ergo estote et vos in hoc; "et non sicut in
imicos tales existimetis," sed sicut passibiha merabra et errantia
eos revocate, ut omnium vestrum corpus salvctis. (2 Thess. iii. 15.)
3. Justin Martyr.
Bial. c. 110. p. 336 B. "Orav xat b rfjg dnoaraaiag dvdqw
nog, 6 '/at sig rdv vxpiarov s'^aXXa XaXdv, snt rfjg yfjg dvo fia
roXfiyajj sig fjfidg rovg Xqiariavovg, /.r.X. (2 Thess. ii. 3.)
4. Irenaeus.
B. III. 7. 2. Et iterum in secunda ad Thessalonicenses, de
antichristo dicens: "Et tunc revelabitur iniquus, quem Dominus
Jesus Christus interficiet spiritu oris sui, et destruet praesentia
adventus sui ilium, cujus est adventus secundum operationera
• The second Epistle to the Thessalonians has been of late assailed. The
arguments mainly rest on c. ii, 1-12, the doctrine of the man of sin. See Baur's
Paulus, or most recently Hilg, Einl, p, 642. Hilgenfeld ascribes it to the reign
of Trajan, See an able reply in Davidson's Int, to N, T, Vol, I, p, 8, &c.
' Polycarp, See under Epistle to Philippians, and note.

254 SECOND THESSALONIANS.
Satanae, in omni virtute et signis, et portentis raendacii. "
(2 Thess. ii. 8.)
B. V. 25. 1. De quo apostolus in epistola, quae est ad
Thessalonicenses secunda, sic ait : " Quoniam nisi venerit absces-
sio primum, et revelatus fuerit homo peccati, filius perditionis,
qui adversatur et extoUit se super orane quod dicitur Deus, aut
colitur: ita ut in templo Dei sedeat, ostendens semetipsum tan
quam sit Deus." (2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.)
5. Clement of Alexandria.
Strom. V. 3. p. 655. "Oi/ iv ndat" cpqatv b dndaroXog "fj
yvdatg' nqoaevyead-e di 'iva qvaddfisv and rdv drdnwv '/at nov-
yqdv dvdqconwv oi ydq ndvrwv fj niang." (2 Thess. iii. 2.)
6. Tertullian.
Be resurrect, carn. c. 24. Et in secunda (sc. epistola ad
Thess.) pleniore sollicitudine ad eosdem: "Obsecro autem vos,
frati'cs, per adventum Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et congrega-
tioncra nostram ad ilium, ne cito commovearaini anirao, neque
turberaini, neque per spiritura, neque per serraonera, scilicet
pseudoprophetarum, neque per epistolam, scilicet pseudapostolo-
rura, ac si per nostrara, quasi insistat dies Doraini." (2 Thess.
ii. 2, 3.)
Scorpiac, c. 13. Paulus vero apostolus de persecutore, qui
primus ecclesiae sanguinem fudit, postea gladiura stilo rautans,
et convertens raachaeram in aratrum, lupus rapax Benjamin, de
hinc ipse adferens escam secundura Jacob, qualiter martyria, jam
et sibi optabilia, comraendat, cura de Thessalonicensibus gaudens,
"Uti," inquit, "glorieraur in vobis in ecclesiis Dei pro tolerantia
vestra et fide, in oranibus persecutionibus et pressuris, quibus
sustinetis ostentaraen justi judicii Dei, ut digni habearaini regno
ejus, pro quo et patiraini. " (2 Thess. i. 4.)

255
xxn.
FIRST TIMOTHY.^
1. Barnabas. 1
C 6. 7. 'Ev aaq'/t ovv avrov fiiXXovrog cpavsqovpdai '/at nda-
xetv. Also c. 6. 14. and other passages. (Comp. 1 Tim. iii. 16.)
2. Clement of Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 7. 3. Kat 'i8iofiev ri '/aXnv, xai ti reqnvdv xai jr^offdex-
Tov ivdniov rov noi-fjaavrog fjfidg. (1 Tim. v. 4.)
' 1 Timothy, The "Pastoral Epistles'' are so named because they contain
instructions to young Pastors ; although the title does not strictly apply to 2 Ti
mothy, The external testimony to them all is sufficient, Clement of Rome may
be said to quote Titus, Polycarp quotes 1 Timothy ; Athenagoras and Theo
philus do so also. Without dwelling on the coincidence in expression between
Justin Martyr and 1 Timothy, we may consider that (even before Irenaeus and
Clement of Alexandria, whose testimony is beyond dispute) the fearly date of the
Pastoral Epistles as a whole (and they stand or fall togetlier) is established. It
is to be observed on the other hand that Marcion, Basilides, and other heretics
rejected them all (see Tert, adv. Marc, V, 21, and Jerome), and that Tatian re
jected those to Timothy but accepted Titus (perhaps because it regards thc here
tics as more specially Jewish), From Tatian's time till this century the Pastoral
Epistles were accepted by all. Schmidt (Int, to N, T. p, 260) suggested doubts
because of discrepancies with Acts. But Schleiermacher, here as elsewhere, was
the leader of many. In his letter to Gass (1807) he denounced 1 Timothy as an
imitation of 2 Timothy and Titus, and founded special objections on its peculiarity
of language, historical difficulties, and the plan of the Epistle, which he regarded
as unworthy of the great Apostle, Baur of course rejected them all. See his
" Die sogenannten Pastoral-Briefe," 1835, aud " Paulus der Apostel, " 1867, Reuss
(Les Epitres Pauliniennes, 1878) rejects 1 Timothy and Titus, but admits 2 Tim
othy as written during the first imprisonment, Meyer, like De Wette, wavered
at different times, but in 1854 (and 1872) believed that they depended on the
more than doubtful basis of a second imprisonment, Huther and Wiesinger ably
defend the authenticity of the letters. In our own country Davidson, Int, to N, T,
1868, ably assails them. See Gloag, Int, to Pauline Epistles, for a clear state
ment of tbe whole case.
' Barnabas, Compare as echo: C, 1, 5, SixaioduvK] ittJTeu); ip'jy\ xa\ te'Xo;
a'yaTCT). (Comp. 1 Tim. i. 5.)
' Clement. Compare as echoes: 1 Clem. 1, 3, directions to old and young,
&o, (1 Tim. V, 1 ; Titus ii, 6); 1 Clem. 2. 1 (1 Tim. vi. 8) ; c, 5, 6 (1 Tim. ii, 7);
c. 44, 6 (1 Tim, iii, 9); c, 51. 1 (1 Tim, v. 14); ^. 56. 1 (1 Tim. v, 21); c, 61, 2
(1 Tim. i. 17).

256 FIRST TIMOTHY.
C. 29. 1. HqoaiXdwfiev ovv avno ev baidryri ipvxyg, ayvdg
'/at dfitdvTOvg /eipag ai^ovTeg nqdg airdv. (1 Tim. ii. 8.)
C. 54. 1. Tig ovv sv Vfilv ysvvalog; rig svanXayyvog; rig
nsnXyqocpoqy fiivog dydnyg; slndrw El dt ifii araatg '/at sqig
'/at ayiofiara, sxywqd, dnsifii ov idv ^oiXyads, '/at noid rd
nqoaraaadfisva vnd rov nXfjdovg' fidvov rd noifiviov rov Xqta
rov slqrjvsvsrw fierd twv '/arsarafiivwv nqsaSvriqwv. Tovrn o
nofyaag savrip fiiya '/Xiog ev Kvqiip nsqtnotyaerai, xai ndg ronog
dixerat avrdv. (1 Tim. iii. 13.)
Second Epistle.^
C. 12. 1. (comp. 17. 4.) 'E'/8exwfisda ovv xad' wqav rfjv §aa-
tXs'tav rov Qeov sv dydny '/at 8i'/aLoavvy, snsi8y crvx o'idafisv
Tiyv fjfiiqav T^g sntg)avsiag rov Qsov. (1 Tim. vi. 14; 2Tim.
i. 10; iv. 1,8; Titus ii. 13.)
C. 15. 1. Oix o'iofiat de oti fit'/qdv avfi^ovXiav snotyadfirjv
nsqi sy/qarsiag, yv notyaag Ttg oi fieravoyaet, dXXd '/at eav-
rdv ffw'ffet '/a fii rdv avfi^ovXsvaavra. Comp. ITim. iv. 16.
C. 19. 1. '!QffT€, ddsXipot '/at d8sXcpat, fisrd rdv Qsdv rqg
dXydsiag avayivdo'/w vfilv s'vrsv^tv sig rd nqoaiysiv rolg ysyqafi-
fiEvotg, 'iya '/at savrovg awayrs -/at rdv dvaytvda'/ovra
sv Vfilv. Corap. 1 Tira. iii. 16; iv. 16.*
C. 20. 6. T^ fidvii) Qeip doqarcp. (1 Tim. i. 17.)
3. Ignatius. ^
Eph. 10. 1. Kat vnsq rdv dXXwv Si dvd-qdnwv ddiaXsinrws
nqoasvxeade. (1 Tim. ii. 1.)
> Compare as echoes: 2 Clem, 8. 6 (1 Tim. vi, 14); c. 15. 1 (1 Tim. iv, 16);
c. 20. 4, 5 (1 Tim. i. 17; ii. 1, &c.).
» This and the previous passages can scarcely be dissociated from 1 Tim,
The preacher may or may not have been the Bishop or President (comp. Just,
Apol. I. 67), but he was one who identified his own Christian life with that
of his hearers. The (jiSTa tov 0so'v seems to indicate that his exhortation fol
lowed the reading of the Divine word. In 2 Clem. 1. 1 he claims Christ as
God the Judge of quick aud dead : in 3, 1 he claims to know the Father of Truth
through Hira ; and there is nothing to prevent — there is much in the tone of the
Homily to warrant — our regarding this fuETa tov ©eov as a reference to the read
ing of New Testament Scripture.
> Ignatius. Compare as echoes: Eph, 20. 1. oJxovo(j,ia; (1 Tim, i, 4), Ibid.
21. 2. ^Xk(8i ifi(A(ov (1 Tim, i, 1). Magnes, 8. 1, |jiij TCXavacjis, x,T.X, (1 Tim, i. 4).

poltcarp. letter to diognetus. 257
4. Polycarp. ^
Philipp. 4. 1. Aqyfj ds ndvrwv yaXsndv cpiXaqyvqia'
slddrsg ovv on ovdiv slayviy/ajisv sig rdv '/dofiov, dXX'
nidi i^evey/elv rt eyofiev, bnXiadfieda rolg bnXoig T^g 8i-
'/atoaivrjg.^ (1 Tim. vi. 7, 10.)
Ibid. 12. 3. Pro oranibus Sanctis orate. Orate etiara pro re
gibus et potestatibus et principibus. (1 Tira. ii. 1, 2.)
5. Letter to Diognetus. i
C 11. 3. Ot, niarot Xoyiadivreg vn' airov, s'yvcoaav narqdg
fivarfjqia. Ov ydqiv dniarsiXs Xdynv, tva '/doficp cpavjj' og, vnd
Xaov drifiaadstg, did anoardXwv '/yqvydstg, vnd idvdv iniarsvdq.
(1 Tim. iii. 16.)
6. Letter op the Church op Vienne and Lyons.
Eus. H. E. V. 1. 'Ynsq§s§Xyfiivwg 8i ivia'/yxpsv fj dqyfj ndaa
... eig "ArraXov Hsqyafirjvdv rip yivei, arvXnv -/at sdqaiwfia
rcov ivravda dst yeynvnra. (1 Tira. iii. 15; comp. Apoeal. iii. 12.)
Ibid. V. 3. 'AX'/i(Stddnv ydq rivng i^ avrwv, ndvv ai'xfiqqnv
§invvTog (iinv, '/at fiydevdg 'dXcog rd nqdreqnv fisraXaft(idvovrng,
d)t.X' y aqn^) finvqi -/at vdart 'yqcofiivov, nsiqiofiivov rs '/at iv rfj
slq'/rfj o'vno dtdysiv, ArrdXio fisrd rdv nqdrov aydva ov ev rep
Uficpidsdrqci) yvvasv, dns'/aXvcpdrj, 'on fifj '/aXdig notoiq 6 'AX'/i-
Pid8rjg, fifj yqwfievog rolg '/riofiaai rov Qeov, '/at dXXoig rvnov
Trail. 8. 2. atpop.ud; (1 Tim, v, 14), Smyrn. 13. 1. TcaptrE'voi;;, Ta; XsyojjiE'va; ^t)'-
pa; (1 Tim. v. 3, 11). Ad Polyc. 4, x-Qpai (1 Tim. v. 3); SoiJXou; (1 Tim. vi. 1).
• Polycarp, Compare as echoes: C, 5. 1 (dfioiu; Siaxovoi a(jiE|jniT0i, xt.X,
(1 Tim, iii. 8, &c,); c, 11, 2 (1 Tim. iii, 5). Chapters 5 and 6 of Polycarp are as
a whole an echo of Paul's injunctions. Only Presbyters and Deacons are spoken
of as officebearers in Polycarp, and no notice is taken" of preaching in the out
line of their duties. It is to character more than to work that he looks.
' Schleiermacher says that this quotation is too vague to be accounted a real
quotation, and at all events cannot resist the suspicion produced by the sub
sequent omission in Polycarp (when treating of wives and widows) of all allusion
to this, the only Epistle in N. T. dealing with the subject of widows. See § IG,
§ 17. p, 229 of Berlin Edition of 1836. Arguments from such omisaion are al
ways precarious. And moreover Polycarp in the next sentence (c. 4, 2) closely
resembles 1 Tim, v, 14 and Titus ii. 4,
> Diognetus. Compare as an echo: C, 4, 6, ^Boai^ua (1 Tim. iii. 16).
17

258 FIRST TIMOTHY.
a'/av8dXov vnoXtndfisvog. Hsiadstg de o 'AX'/i^id8yg , ndvrwv
dvi8yv fiereXdfi^ave '/at yiyaq'tazei rip Qeip. (1 Tim. iv. 3, 4.)
7. Justin Martyr.^
Bial. c. 7. p. 225 B (compare also c. 35. p. 253 A). Td T^g
nXdvyg nveifiara '/at daifidvia do^oXoyoiiatv. (1 Tim. iv. 1.)
8. Hegesippus. ^
Eus. H. E. III. 32.2
'Ent rovroig b airdg dvfjq (^Hyfjainnng) diyynifievog rd xara
TOiJg 8yXovfii.vo'vg , ijctXiyet dg dqa fiiyqt rdv rdrs yqdvwv naq-
¦divng xadaqd '/at ddtdcpdoqng sfistvev fj i'/'/Xyaia, iv d8yX(j) nov
axoriwg cpcoXevnvrwv ela in rdre rdv, el '/ai Ttveg vnfjqyov, na-
qacpdsiqsiv iniysiqovvzwv rdv vytfj '/avdva rov acoryqiov xr/-
qvyfiarog. 'iig d' 6 le^og rdv dnoardXwv yoqdg dtdcpnqov slXqcpsi
TOV §iov riXng, naqsXyXvdsi rs fj ysvsd i'/sivy rdv airalg d'/nalg
T^g ivdiov aocpiag inaxovaat '/ary^iw fiivwv, ryvixavra rfjg ddiov
nXdvyg aqyfjv iXdfi^avsv fj avaraaig, 8id T^g twv cTe^odida-
ffxaAwv dndryg' o'i '/at, are' fiydevdg I'ti tcSv dnoardXwv Xein-
ofiivov, yvfivjj Xotndv y8y rfj '/scpaXjj np T^g dXydsiag '/yqvyfiart
T'fjv ipsv8 WW fiov yvwaiv dvTixyqvTTSiv snsxeiqovv.

' Justin. Compare as possible echoes: Dial, c. 7. p, 225 B; and the
numerous passages where ^EoaE^Eia and sua^peia are used as in the Pastoral
Epistles, The latter word, found (save once in Acts) only in those Epistles and
2 Peter in the N, T., is found in Justin with the same mining. Thus Di.al, c, 4,
p. 222 E, SixaioauvY) xal EM'oE'pEia; Dial. c. 95. p, 323 A; Dial, c. 110. p. 337 A,
So also Ssoa^pEia Dial. c. 110. p. 337 A, &c.
1 Hegesippus, See p. 127 and note.
* Baur made a great deal of this passage. The chief point is the assertion
that the Church remained a chaste virgin until after the death of the Apostles,
Upon this Baur founded an argument for the late date of the Pastoral Epistles
as they dealt with the corruption of the Church caused by heresy. But the reply
is that Hegesippus only says that those who pervert the sound doctrine of tho
Gospel did not dare to show their heads freely until after the death of the
Apostles. Baur also urges that Hegesippus, an Ebionite, was unlikely to quote
the words of St Paul ; but it is obvious that a forger in the Pauline interest was
as little likely to quote Hegesippus. There is, moreover, no valid proof that Heg
esippus was a foe of Paulinism, See Wieseler, die Briefe an Timotheus u, Titus,
Supplement-Band III, Herzog's Encyclopaedic. He identifies the heresies of the
Pastoral Epistles with the teachings of ApoUonius of Tyana.

athenagoras. theophilus. irenaeus. clement. 259
9. Syriac, Old Latin, and Muratorian Canon.
(See before, pp. 1, 2, 6, 7.)
10. Athenagoras.
Legatio, c. 16. Hd-vra ydq b Qsdg iartv airdg ainp, cpcog
dnqnairov, '/dofiog riXsiog, nvsvfia, dvvafiig, Xdyng. (1 Tim.
vi. 16.) Lbid. c. 37. "Omog 'qqsfiov xai fjavymv jiinv 8idyoifisv. (1 Tiin.
ii. 2.)
1 1 . Theophilus. ^
Ad Autolyc. LLL. 14. p. 126. "En fiyv '/at nsqt rov vnnrda-
aeadai aqyaig xat i^ovaiaig xat evyeadat vniq aircov, '/eXevsi
fjfidg b delog Xdyog 'onwg yqefiov '/at fjavyiov ^inv didycofisv.
(1 Tim. ii. 1, 2; comp. Tit. iii. 1.)
12. Irenaeus.
B.L. 1, 1. 'Ent^ rfjv dXydstav naqansfindfievoi Ttveg insiady-
ovat Xdyovg xpsvdslg xat yeveaXoyiag fiaraiag, airivsg tyrfjastg
fidXXov naqiyovai, '/adcog 6 a?roffro/log cpqaiv, rj oi'/odofifjv Qeov
rfjv sv niarei. (1 Tim. i. 4.)
B. II. 14, 7. Et bene Paulus ait, "vocum novitates^ falsae
agnitionis." (1 Tira. vi. 20.)
13. Clement of Alexandria.
Strom. II. 11. p. 457. Heqt ^g o dndarnXog yqdcpwv ""i3
Tifiddee," cprjatv, "rfjv naqa'/aradfj/yv cpvXa^ov i'/rqendfievng rdg
§s§qXnvg '/evocpwviag xat dvzidiaeig T^g xpsvdwvvfiov yvwascog,
yv Tivsg inayyeXXdfisvoi, nsqt Tr}v nianv yardyyaav." 'Ynd rav-
Tj^g iXsyyofisvot rfjg cpwvfjg nl dnd rdv alqiaswv rdg nqdg Ti-
findsnv ddsrnvaiv iniaroXdg.'^ (ITim. vi. 20. 21.)
> Theophilus. Add as echo: C, 1. 2 (1 Tim, i, 10).
' Irenaeus, 'Etcei (?).
* Irenaeus seems to have read xaivotpuvta;. So Chrysostom (2 Tim. ii. 10),
The Latin Fathers (with the Vulgate) have vocum novitates. 17*

260 FIRST TIMOTHY.
Ibid. III. 12. p. 552. "Odsv '/at 6 anoaroXog, "§ovXofiai
ovv," cpqat, "vswriqag yajislv, rsr/voyovelv, olxo8eanoreiv, firjde-
fiiav dcpoqfirjv dtddvat rip dvri'/eifiivcp Xntdoqiag ydqtv. "H8y yaq
Ttveg i^erqdnyaav dniaw rov ^aravd." (1 Tira. v. 14, 15.)
Prot. c. 9. p. 11. Qsoas§SLa 8s nqdg ndvra wcpiXifiog,
'/ard rdv HavXov, snayysXtav syovaa £w^g T^g viiv '/at
rqg fisXXovayg. (1 Tira. iv. 8.)
14. Tertullian.
Adv. Marc. V. 21. See before (Phileraon).
Be praescript. haeret. c. 25. Et hoc verbo usus est Paulus
ad Timotheum: "0 Timothee, depositum custodi." (1 Tim. vi.
20.) Et rursus: "Bonum depositura serva." (2 Tim. i. 14.)
Be pudicit. c. 13. Plane idem Apostolus Hymenaeura et Alex
andrum Satanae tradidit, ut emendarentur non blasphemare, sicut
Timotheo suo scribit. (1 Tim. i. 20.)
15. Jerome.
Comment, in ep. ad Tit. prooem. (Vol. VII. p. 685.) Licet non
sint digni fide, qui fidem primam irritam fecerunt, Marcionera loquor
et Basilidera et omnes haereticos, qui vetus laniant Testaraentum :
tamen eos aliqua ex parte ferremus, si saltem in novo continerent
manus suas, et non auderent Christi (ut ipsi jactitant) boni Dei
filii, vel Evangelistas violare, vel Apostolos. Nunc vero quum
et Evangelia ejus dissipaverint, et Apostolorura epistolas, non
Apostolorum Christi fecerint esse, sed proprias, rairor quoraodo
sibi Christianorum nomen audeant vindicare. Ut enira de cae
teris epistolis taceara, de quibus quicquid contrariura suo dograati
viderant, eraserunt, nonnuUas integras repudiandas crediderunt,
ad Tiraotheura videlicet utramque, ad Hebraeos, et ad Titum
quam nunc conamur exponere. Et si quidem redderent causas
cur eas Apostoli non putarent; tentaremus aliquid respondere et
forsitan satisfacere lectori. Nunc vero cura haeretica auctoritate
pronuntient et dicant : " ilia epistola Pauli est, haec non est," ea
' Clement. Marcion, Basilides, and others rejected all the Pastoral Epistles.
Tatian rejected also the two Epistles to Timothy, but accepted that to Titus.

JEROME. 261
auctoritate refelli se iiro veritate intelligant, qua ipsi non eru-
bescunt falsa siraulare. Sed Tatianus, Encratitarum patriarches,
qui et ipse nonnuUas Pauli epistolas repudiavit, hanc vel maxime,
hoc est ad Titum, Apostoli pronunciandam credidit, parvi pen
dens Marcionis et aliorum, qui cura eo in hac parte consentiunt,
assertionem. Scribit igitur Apostolus, o Paula et Eustochium,
de Nicopoli, quae in Actiaco littore sita, nunc possessionis vestrae
pars vel raaxiraa est; et scribit ad Titura discipulum suum, et
in Christo filium, quem Cretae reliquerat ad ecclesias instruen-
das: praecepitque ei, ut cura e duobus Arteraas, seu Tychicus
Cretara fuerit appulsus, ipse Nicopolira veniat. Justura quippe
erat, ut ille qui dixerat, "Solhcitudo raea omnium ecclesiarum,"
et qui Evangeliura Christi usque ad Illyricura de Jerosolyrais pro-
ficiscens, fundaverat, non pateretur et sui et Titi absentia Cre-
tenses esse desertos, a quibus priraura idololatriae seraina pullu-
larunt: sed mitteret eis pro se et Tito Arteman, vel Tychicura,
quorum doctrina et solatio confovCrentur.

262
xxm.
SECOND TIMOTHY.
{compare sections i-iu. xl xii.)
1. Barnabas. 1
C. 7. 2. El ovv 6 Ifog Toi; Qsov, wv Kvqiog, '/at fiiXXcov
xqivsiv tiorrag '/at vsxqovg, snadsv, iva fj ^rXyyfj airov twononjay
fjfiag, niarsvawfisv on b Yldg rov Qsov ni'/ ydvvarn nad-slv sl
ftfj dt fjfidg (2 Tira. iv. 1 ; corap. Acts x. 42, and 1 Pet. iv. 5.)
2. Clement of Rome.
First Episl/v.^
Second Ejiislle.^
3. Ignatius, i
Smyrn. c. 9 and c. 10. Kara ndvra fis dvenavaare, '/at vfidg
'Iqaovg Xqiardg. 'Andvra fie '/at naqdvra fjyanyaars' dfisi^nt
Vftlv Qsdg, dt' ov ndvra vnofisvovrsg, airov rsv^sads. . . . dvri-
xpvyov Vficov rd nvsvfid fiov '/at rd dsofid fiov, a oiy vnsqycpav-
fjaars,. ni8E inyayiv^dyrs. Oi8i vfidg snataxwdyasrai fj rsXsia
niang, 'lyaovg Xqiardg. (2 Tim. i. 16, 18.)
4. Polycarp. *
Philipp. c. 5. 2. Kadwg vniaysro fjfilv iyelqat fjfidg ex ve-
' Barnabas. Compare as echo : C. 4, 6 £;T;iotdpeijovTa; (2 Tim. iv. 3, &c.).
1 Clement, Compare as echoes: 1 Clem. c. 5. 6 (2 Tim. i, 11); c. 27. 3
(2 Tim. i. 6); c. 44. 5 (2 Tim. iv, 6); c. 44 6 (2 Tim, i, 3); u. 55, 3 (2 Tim, ii. 1).
2 Compare as echoes: 2 Clem. t. 7. 3 (2 Tim. iv, 7); c. 7, 4; 20. 2 (2 Tim.
ii. 5), ' Ignatius. Compare as echoes: Eph, 2. 1. a'vai|(u^ai (2 Tim, i, 16), Rom,
2, 2. aitovSiai-fjvai (2 Tim, iv. 6). Ad Polycarp. 6, 2, ap^axETE (2 Tim, ii, 4).
' Polycarp. As an echo, compare the Salutation with 2 Tim, i, 2; Titus i, 4,

athenagoras. irenaeus. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. 263
x^t3v, '/at on idv nnXtrsvadfisda d^icog airnv, '/at avfifiaaiXsi-
aofisy ainp, e'iye niarevofiev. (2 Tira. ii. 11, 12.)
C. 9. 2. Oi ydq rdv vvv qydnrjasv aldva, aXXd rdv
vniq fjficov dnodavdvra /at dt' fjfidg vnd rov Qsnv dvaardvra.
(2 Tim.' iv. 10.)
5. Athenagoras. 1
6. Irenaeus.
B. III. 3, 3. QsfisXidaavrsg ovv '/at ol'/odofiyaavrsg ol fia-
¦/dqtot dndaroXoi ti}v i'/'/Xyaiav, Aivio r-qv r^g intaxonyg Xsi-
rovqyiav ivsysiqiaav. Tnvrov rnv Aiynv HavXng iv ralg nqdg
Tifiodsov iniaroXalg fiifivrjrat.^ (2 Tim. iv. 21.)
B. IIL 14, 1. 2 Tim. iv. 9, 10, 11. (Comp. before on Acts,
p. 200.) B. V. 20, 2. Tales sunt autera omnes haeretici . . . semper
quaerentes et nunquara verura invenientes. (2 Tim. iii. 7.)
7. Clement op Alexandria.
Strom. I. \. p. 317. "~v ovv ivdvvafiov," -/at HavXog Xiyet,
"iv ydqizi tjj iv Xqianp 'lyanv' '/at a 'rj'/ovaag naq' ifiov, did
nnXXwv fiaqrvqcov, ravra naqddov Tciarolg dvdqconoig, o'irivsg
I'/avot sanvzai '/at sriqovg 8L8d^ai." Kat ndXiv "2nov8aaov
asavrdv dnxifinv naqaarqaai rqi Qsco, iqydryv dvsnaiayvvrov, dq-
dorofio vvra rdv Xdyov rfjg dXydsiag. (2 Tim. ii. 1, 2, 15.)
Lbid. IL 11. p. 457; (See before, 1 Tira. p. 259.)
Ibid. III. 6; p. 536. "lajisv ydq '/at 'oaa nsqt dta'/dvcov yv-
vat'/dv EV rfj sriqa nqdg Tifiddeov iniaroXfj 6 yevvaiog diarda-
aerat HavXog.
Protr. c. 9. p. 71. Tavrrjv b AnoaroXog rfjv 8i8aa'/aXiav
dsiav o'vTwg iniardfiEvog "2v de, w Tifiddee," cpqatv, "and (iqi-
cpovg rd Isqd yqdfifiara oldag, rd dvvdfisvd as aocpiaai sig aco
ryqiav, 8id niarscog iv Xqianp." (2 Tira. iii. 15.)
» Athenagoras. Echo: 1. 1, 'AvSpuiioi; i'xouai tov voOv xaTEjpSapuv'vov
(2 Tim. iii. 8.)
» Irenaeus, From Eus. H. E. V. 6. Nicephor. H. E, IV. 15.

264 second timothy.
8. Tertullian.
Be praescript. adv. haeret. c. 25. (See above on 1 Tira. p. 260.)
Scorpiace, c. 13. Vides quam martyrii definiat felici tatem,
cui de gaudio mutuo acquirit solemnitatera, ut proxiraus denique
voti sui factus est, qualiter de prospectu ejus exultans scribit
Tiraotheo: "Ego enim jam libor, et tempus dijunctionis instat.
Agoncm bonura decertavi, cursum consunimavi, fidem custodivi;
superest porona, quam mihi Dorainus ilia die reddet, scilicet pas-
sionis." (2 Tim. iv. 6, 7, 8.)
9. Origen.
Comment, in Matth. series vet. interpretat. c. 117. (Migne,
Vol. III. p. 1769.) Itera quod ait: "Sicut Jaranes et Marabres
restiterunt Moysi," non invenitur in publicis scripturis, sed in
libro secrete, qui suprascribitur : "Jaranes et Marabres liber."
Unde ausi sunt quidam Epistolam ad Timotheum repellere, quasi
habentem in se textum ahcujus secreti, sed non potuerunt.
(2 Tim. iii. 8.)
10. Eusebius.
H. E. II. 22. 'Ev ^ 8safiolg iydfisvog r-fjv nqdg Ttfiddeov
8evTiqav sntaroXyv awrdrrst, bfiov ayjiaivwv T'fjv re nqorsqav
ainp ysvofisvyv dnoXoyiav, xat rfjv naqanddag reXeiwaiv. Asyov
8fj '/at roinoyv rdg airov fiaqrvqiag' "'Ev tjj nqdrrj fiov,"
cpqatv, "dnoXoyia oi8sig jtot avfinaqsyivsro, aXXd nav
rsg fis iyxariXtnov, {jifj airolg Xoytadeiy), b 8e Kiqiog
fioL naqsary v.at svs8vvdfiwai fie, tva 8i ifiov rd '/'fjqvyfia
nXyqocpoqydy, xat dxovawat ndvra rd sdvy. Kat s^-
qvad-yv EX ardfiarog Xiovrog." 2acpdg 8i naqiaryai dta tou
twv, OTt 8y rd nqdrsqov, 'onwg dv rd xfjqvyfia rd dt avrov nXyqwdety
s^qiady ex ardfiafog Xiovrog, rdv Niqwva ravry, dg soixe, did
rd dfiddvfiov nqnaetndv. Oi/ ovv s^fjg nqoaridsi'/e naqanXyaidv
Tt rip, ^vaerai fie sx ardfiarog Xiovrog. 'Edqa ydq rip
nvsvfiart rfjv oaov ovnw fiiXXovaav avzov rsXsvrfjv. Atd cpyatv
iniXiywv np "'/at i^^vadyv ex ardfiarog Xiovrog," rd "^vaerai fie
6 Kvqtog dnd navrdg s'qyov novyqov, xat adaet elg rfjv ^aatXeiav

eusebius. 265
avrov Tjyv innvqdvmv," ayfiaiviov rd naqavrixa fiaqrvqiov, o xat
aacpiarsqov iv rfj avrfj nqoXiysi yqacpfj cpdo'/cov "'Eyw ydq 'ydy
aniv8nfiaL, '/at n '/aiqng T»]g ififjg dvaXiaswg icpiary/sv."
Nvv ftiv ovv int rijg Sevriqag iniaroXyg nov nqdg Tifiddeov, rdv
Aov/dv fidvov yqdcpovn aircp awelvat dqXol, '/ard 8i rfjv nqo
riqav dnoXoyiav oi8i rnvrov. "Odev el'/drwg rdg rdv dnoardXwv
Hqd^eig in i/elvov b Aov/dg neqiiyqaipe rnv yqc'ivov, rfjv fiiy
qig ore np HavXoi avvqv laroqiav vcpqyqadfievng. Tavra di fjfilv
s'iqrjcai naqiarafiivoig, on fifj '/ad' "v o Aov/dg dviyqaxpsv int
rfjg 'Pdfiyg inidyfiiav roi HaiXnv, rd fiaqrvqiov avrcp avvsnsq-
dvdy. Elxdg yi rot xard jiiv dqydg qnidrsqov rov Niqcovog dia-
'/sifiivov q^ov rfjv vniq rnv ddyfiarog rov HavXov '/aradsydyvai
dnoXoyiav. HqosXddvrog di sig ddsfiirovg rdXfiag fisrd rdv dX
Xwv x.at rd xard rdv anoardXcov enixetqfjaai.^
Ibid. III. 4. Tdv de Xotniov dxoXoidwv rov HavXov, Kqia/yg
fiiv ent rdg FaXXiag^ arsiXdjisvng vn avrnv fiaqrvqelrat, Alvng
8i, nh fiifivrjzat avvnvrog snt 'Pdfiyg ainp '/ard rfjv Ssvriqav
nqdg Tifiodsov iniaroXyv, nqdrog fisrd Hirqov T^g 'Pwfiaiwv
i'/'/Xyaiag ti)v inia'/onyv ydy nqdrsqov xXyqwdstg 8s8yXwrai.
• Eusebius. Others read: £y)^Eipirii'nvai.
2 See 2 Tim. iv, 2. Others read : Ei; raXX(av, others : si; Ti^v FaXaTtav.

266

XXIV.
TITUS.
{compare sections i-iu. xi. xii.)
1. Barnabas.^
2. Clement op Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 2. 7. 'Erotfioi elg ndv s'qyov ayaddv. (Tit. iii. 1.)
3. Ignatius. ^
4. Irenaeus.
B. I. 16. 3. "Oaot de dcpiaravrai T^g sxxXyaiag xat rovroig
rolg yqad8sat fivdoig neidovrat, dXyddg avTO'/ardxqtroi. Ovg b
HavXog iyxsXsisrat fjfilv fisrd fiiav xai 8svTiqav vovdsaiav naq-
atrsladai. (Tit. iii. 10.)
B. LII. 3. 4. Toaavryv ol dndaroXot '/at ol fiadyrat airdv
sayov siXd^siav, nqdg rd fiydi fiixQt Xdyov xoivwvelv rivt rdv
naqayaqaaadvrwv rfjv dX'ijdeiav, wg xat HavXog ecpyaev alqert-
'/dv dvd-qwnov fierd fiiav xat 8svriqav vovdsaiav naqatrov, sl-
8dg on s^iarqanrat 6 roiovrog, '/at dftaqrdvst, cov airo'/ard-
x^iTog.i (Tit. iii. 10, 11.)
B. V. 15. 3. Jesus dixit ei: "Vade in Siloam, et lavare,"
simul et plasmationera et eam, quae est per lavacrum, regenera-
tionera restituens ei. (Tit. iii. 5.)
> Barnabas. Echo : i'k-Kli gorfl; (Tit. i. 2, &c,),
' Clement. Echoes: 1 Clement 26. 1 and 35, 2 (Tit, ii, 10) ; c. 27. 2 (Tit. i. 2);
c, 64 (Tit. il, 14).
' Ignatius. Echoes: Magnes, 6.2, tuhov (Titus ii, 7), Ibid, 8, 1, (AU^eu-
,UCf?tv (Titus i, 14; iii, 9), Trail. 3. 2, xaTaaTT|[Jia (Titus ii, 3).
> Irenaeus, The Greek from Eus. H, E. IV. 14,

athenagoras. theophilus. justin martyr. clement. 267
5. Tatian.
Jerome, comment, in ep. ad Tit. prooem. (See before, 1 Tira.
p. 260.)
6. Athenagoras.
II. 16. Aid v8aTog xat Xovrqov naXtyyeveaiag. (Tit. iii. 5.)
7. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. II. 16. p. 95. "Oncog jj xai toi^to eig 8siyfia rov
fiiXXsiv Xafi^dvsLV rovg dvdqdnovg fieravotav '/at acpeatv dfiaqridv
8id v8arog xat Xovrqov naXiyyeveaiag ndvrag rovg nqoatdvrag
' ry dXydeicf, '/at dvayevvwfiivovg '/at Xafi^dvovrag eiXoyiav naqd
rov Qsov. (Tit. iii. 5, 6.)
Ibid. III. 9. p. 122. 'AXXd vofiodiryv s'yofisv rdv 'ovrwg Qsdv,
og '/at 8i8daxeL fjfidg 8t'/aionqayelv xal eiae^elv '/at '/aXonotelv.
(Tit. ii. 11, 12.) 8. Justin Martyr.
Bial. c. 47. p. 266 B. 'H ydq yqyaroryg '/at f cpiXavdqconia
rnv Qeov xai to dfierqov rov nXovrov avrov, '/.r.X. (Titus iii. 4.)
9. Clement op Alexandria.
Strom. I. 13. p. 350. Oaai 8s 'EXXyvsg fierd ye 'Oqcpia '/at
Alvov . . . int aocpia nqdrovg davfiaad-fjvat rovg snrd, rovg
ini'/Xydivrag aocpovg. . . . rdv di s^doftov, ot fiiv Hsqiavdqov
slvai Xiyovatv rdv Koqivd-tov, ol di 'Avdyaqatv rdv ^/vd-yv, ol
de 'Enifisvidyv rdv Kqfjca, ov 'EXXrjvt'/dv olds nqocprjtyv, ov fiifi-
vTjrat b 'AnoaroXog HavXog iv rfj nqdg Tirov iniaroXy, Xiywv
ovrwg' Etniv Ttg e| aircov 'idtog nqocpfjcqg ovrwg' Kqyrsg ast
xpsvarai, xa'/d drjqia, yaariqsg dqyai. (Tit. i. 12.)
Prot. c. 1. p. 7. Kara ydq rdv dsaniaiov s'/slvov roi Kv
qiov 'AnoaroXov, fj ydqig roii Qsnv y acorfjqing ndatv dvdqwnotg
inscpdvq , naidevovaa fjfidg, 'iva, dqvyadfievot rqv aai^siav '/.Axt
rdg '/oafuxdg inidvfiiag acocpqdvwg '/at dixaiwg xat evas^wg ty-

268 SECOND timothy.
acofiev iv rep viv aidvi, nqoadeydfievoi rfjv jia'/aqtav sXnida xat
inicpdveiav rfjg dd^yg nni fisydXov Qeov, xat 2wryqog fjficov Irjaov
Xqiaroi.-' (Tit. ii. 11-13.)
10. Tertullian.
Be praescript. haeret. c. 6. Nec diutius de isto, si idem est
Paulus, qui et alibi haereses inter carnaha crimina numerat, scrib
ens ad Galatas, et qui Tito suggerit, horainera haereticura post
primam correptionera recusandura, quod perversus sit ejusraodi
et dehnquat, ut a seraetipso daranatus. (Tit. iii. 10, 11.)
Adv. Marcion. V. 21. (See below on Philemon.)
' Clement cites this Epistle repeatedly.

269

XXV.
PHILEMON.
{compare sections i-iii xi. xii.)
1. Syriac and Old Latin Versions. Muratorian Canon.
(See before, pp. 1, 2, 6, 7,)
2. Tertullian;
Adv. Marcion. V. 21. Soli huic epistolae brevitas sua pro-
fuit,^ ut falsarias manus Marcionis evaderet. Miror tamen cum
ad unum horainera literas factas receperit, quid ad Tiraotheura
duas, et unara ad Titura de ecclesiastico statu corapositas re-
cusaverit. Adfectavit, opinor, etiam numerum epistolarum inter
polare. 3. Origen.
Homil. in Jerem. 19. (Migne, Vol. III. p. 501.) "Ojzeq '/at 6
HavXog sniardfisvog, sXeyev iv ry nqdg WiXyfiova iniaroXfj np
(DiX'Tjfiovi nsqt rov Ovrjaifiov tva fifj '/ar' dvdy/yv to dyaddv aov
Jj, dXXd '/ard sr/oiaiov. (v. 14.)
Matth. comment, series, tract. 33. (Migne, Vol. III. p. 1707.)
De Paulo autem dictum est ad Philemonera: "Nunc autem ut
Paulus senex," cum esset adolescentulus quando Stephanus pro
Christi testimonio lapidabatur, et ipse vestimenta servabat inter-
ficientiura eum. (v. 9.)
Ibid, tract. 34. (Migne, Vol. III. p. 1715.) Sicut Paulus ad
Philemonem dicit: "gaudium enim magnura habuiraus, et conso
lationem in charitate tua, quia viscera sanctorum requieverunt
per te, frater." (v. 7.)

' Tertullian. The chief value of this passage is its explicit statement that
the short Epistle to Philemon was in Marcion's Canon, Epiphanius makes the
same statement, Haer, 42. 9, p. 310. See before, page 242. Irenaeus and Clem,
Alex, do not cite it.

270 philemon.
4. Eusebius.
H. E. III. 25. See before, p. 10.

5. Jerome.
Comment, in Ep. ad Philem. prooem. (Vol. VII. p. 741.) Qui
nolunt inter epistolas Pauli eara recipere quae ad Philemonera scrib
itur, aiunt, non seraper Apostolura, nec orania, Christo in se loquente,
dixisse: quia nec humana irabecilhtas unum tenorem Sancti Spiritus
ferre potuisset: nec hujus corpusculi necessitates sub praesentia
Domini semper complerentur; velut disponere prandiura, cibura ca
pere, esurire, saturari, ingesta digerere, exhausta complere; taceo
de caeteris, quae exquisite et coacte replicant. ... His et cae
teris istiusmodi, volunt autem epistolam non esse Pauli, quae ad
Phileraonem scribitur: aut etiam si Pauli sit, nihil habere quod
aedificare nos possit; et a plerisque veteribus repudiatara, dum
comraendandi tantum scribatur officio, non docendi. At e con
trarie qui germanae auctoritatis eara esse defendunt, dicunt num-
quara in toto orbe a cunctis ecclesiis fuisse susceptara, nisi Pauli
apostoli crederetur: et hac lege ne secundara quidem ad Tirao
theura, et ad Galatas eos debere suscipere, de quibus et ipse
huraanae imbecillitatis exempla protulerit. "Penulara quam re
liqui Troade apud Carpum, veniens tecura afl'er." Et: "Utinara
excidantur qui vos conturbant." Inveniri pluriraa et ad Romanos
et ad caeteras ecclesias, maxiraeque ad Corinthios remissius et
quotidiano pene sermone dictata, in quibus apostolus loquatur:
"Caeteris autera ego dico, non Dominus." Quas et ipsas quia
aliquid tale habeant, aut Pauli epistolas non putandas, aut si
istae recipiuntur, recipiendam esse et ad Philemonem, ex prae-
judicio similium receptarura. Valde autem eos et sirapliciter er
rare, si putent cibura eraere, hospitiura praeparare, vestiraenta
conquirere, esse peccatura. ... Et quoniara Marcionis fecimus
mentionem, Pauli esse epistolam ad Marcionera, saltem Marcione
auctore doceantur. Qui cum caeteras epistolas ejusdem vel non
susceperit, vel quaedam in his mutaverit atque corroserit, in hanc
solam manus non est ausus mittere: quia sua illara brevitas de-
fendebat. Sed raihi videntur dura epistolam siraplicitatis arguunt,

JEROME. 271
suara imperitiam prodere; non intelligentes quid in singuhs ser
monibus virtutis ac sapientiae lateat. Quae, orantibus vobis, et
ipso nobis Sancto Spiritu suggerente, quo scripta sunt, suis locis
explanare conabiraur. Si autera brevitas habetur conteratui, con-
teranatur Abdias, Naiim, Sophonias, et ahi duodecim propheta
rum, in quibus tam raira et tam grandia sunt quae feruntur, ut
nescias utrum brevitateni sermonum in illis admirari debeas, an
maguitudinem sensuura. Quod si intelligerent hi, qui epistolara
ad Phileraonera repudiant, numquain brevitatera despicerent; quae
pro laciniosis legis oneribus, evangelien decore conscripta est,
dura breviatura consuraraaturaque serraonera facit Dorainus super
terrara. Sed jam ipsa Apostoli verba ponenda sunt, quae ita
incipiunt: Paulus vinctus Christi Jesu, cS^c.^
• Jerome, Similar testimony to the value and Pauline origin of this Epistle
is given by Chrysostom, who like Jerome had to defend it against the charge
of being on a subject below the great Apostle's notice.

272
XX VL
HEBREWS.^
{compare sections i-iil xl xil)
1. Barnabas.^
C. 5. 6. Karaqyqay rdv ddvarov, '/at rfjv ex vs'/qdv dvd
araaiv dsi^y, 'on iv aaq'/t edet airdv cpavsqwdrjvai, vnsfisivsv.
(Heb. ii. 14, &c.)
2. Clement of Rome.^
First Epistle.
Eus. H. E. m. 38. (See below.)
' The chief interest in regard to this Epistle attaches to the history of opin
ions on its Canonicity. See a very full account of the history of the circula
tion and acceptance of the Epistle in Bleek's Commentar zu dem Brief an die He-
brSer (Einl. §§ 21-100), and (after Bleek) in Alford's Commentary, Vol. IV. Part 1.
It was accepted as Paul's in Alexandria and throughout the Eastern Church from
the earliest times downwards. In the Latin Church, on the other hand, it was
not explicitly favoured by any writer of the Latin Church (either in Rome or
Africa) until the fourth century, when the united influence of Jerome and Augus
tine gave it an apostolic place in the esteem of the Church, The undoubted
instances of correspondence between the Epistle of Clement of Rome and Hebrews
become therefore specially interesting, and they are pretty fully given in the text.
That it was written to Alexandrian Jews led to its less immediate recognition in
the Western Church than in Alexandria ; its apparent countenance to the views
of tbe Montanists (VI, 4-8) perhaps made the orthodox Latins reject it, so that
the Montanists were afraid to quote it as an authority. Many authors (or scribes)
have been suggested for it. Luther's idea that it might be Apollos has been
largely -adopted, — mainly in a kind of despair of finding any better solution of
the difficulty. ' Barnabas has several passages which are parallel with the Epistle to the
Hebrews rather than suggestive of it: Comp, c, 5 and 6 with Hebrews, especially
c. 5. 1 with Heb, xii. 24 ; c. 6, 11 with Heb. vi, 6 ; and c. 19, 9, &c. with Heb. xiii.
7, &c. There is alfjia TOu pavTiajJiaTo; auToC, Barn. 5, 1, which suggests Heb, xii.
24 and 1 Pet, i. 2,
*, Clement. Compare as echoes (the number might be increased) : 1 Clem.
1. 3, corap, Heb. xiii. 7; c. 2, 1, corap, Heb, xiii. 5; c. 16. 2, comp. Heb, i. 3 and
viii. 1 ; c. 21. 1, comp. Heb. xiii, 21 ; c, 27, 2, comp, Heb. vi, 18 and x. 23; c. 27.
2, 4, comp, Heb. i, 3, vi, 18 (the use of Xoyo; not personification as in Wisdom
xii. 12 ; xi, 22) ; c, 34, 1, comp, Heb. vi, 12 and xii. 12 ; c. 34. 5, comp. Heb. iii. 6 ;
c. 51 3, comp. Heb. iii. 8; c. 64, 1, comp, Heb. xii. 9. Nothing can be learned
from Clement as to the authorship.

CLEMENT OF ROME. 273
C. 9. 2. 'Arsviacofiev elg rovg reXelcog Xeirovqyrjaavrag rfj fiey-
aXnnqsnsl ddh,y airov. (Heb. xii. 1, 2.) Ad(iiofisv 'Evioy, og ev
vna'/nfj di'/aing svqedslg fisrsridq, '/at nv'y svqiOy aiznv d-dvazog.
]Sde jciazng e'vqedeig 8id zqg Xeizovqyiag avrov jcaXiyysvealav
'/dafuij ix-qqv^sv, '/at Siiawas dt' aizov b 8eaic6zqg zd slasXtJdvza
iv bfinvnia tcoa sig 'zyv '/ijicoznv. (Heb. xi. 5, 7.)^
G. 10. 1. 'Aliqadfi, b cpiXog nqoaaynqsvdetg, niardg s'vqidq
iv rep avrdv vnfj/oov yeviadat rolg qfjfiaat rnv Qeov. Ovrog di'
Ina'/nqg i^fjXdsv ex T^g yqg avrnv, x«i ex T^g avyyeveiag airov,
'/at ex ToiJ oi'xoD TOti narqdg airnv, nnwg yfjv nXiyqv, -/at avy-
yiveiav aaSevfj, '/at ni'/ov fir/qdv '/azaXincov , '/Xyqovofiyay rdg
ijcayyeXiag rov Qeo'v. (Heb. xi. 7, 8, 9.)
C 17. 1. Mifiyrat yevdfisda '/d'/eiviov, o'inveg iv diqfiaaiv
alyeioig -/at fiqXcoralg nsqiendryaav, xqqiaaovreg rfjv sXsvaiv rov
Xqtarov' Xiynfisv di 'HXiav ~/at 'EXiaaais, eTt de '/at 'istsxifjX
rovg nqocpqrag, 7cqdg rovroig '/at rovg fisfiaqrvqyfiivovg. (Heb.
xi. 37.) C. 17. 5. Mwvafjg niardg 'sv bXcjj np o'ixc^ avzov i/Xydy.
Comp. c. 43. 1 ; Num. xii. 7.' (Heb. iii. 2.)
C. 19. 1. Tibv roaovrwv ovv '/at roiovrwv owwg fisfiaqrvqij-
fiivcov, . . . inavadqdfiwfisv int rdv i§ aqyfjg naqa8s8ofiivov fjfilv
rfjg slqfjvyg O'/ondv. (Heb. xii. 1, 2; Phil. iii. 14; and 1 Cor. ix. 24.)
C. 21. 9. 'Eqevvqryg ydq ianv ivvoidv '/at svdvfirjaswv oh fj
nvofj airov iv fjfilv iartv, xai oTav diXy dvsXsl airfy. (Heb.
iv. 12.) C. 36. 2. Og wv dnaiyaafia T^g fisyaXwavvyg aizov, roa-
ovrcj) fisitwv iartv dyyiXwv, 'daq) diacpoqdrsqov bvofia '/S'/Xyqovdji-
y/ev. liyqanrai ydq ovrwg' "'0 no tdv roig dyyiXovg airov
nvsvfiara, '/at rovg Xsirovqyovg airov nvqdg cpXdya," int 8i tc<5
v'lip airov ovnog elnev b deandryg' "Yiog fiov et av, eyd afjfie
qov yeyivvij'/d ae' a'iryaat naq' ifiov, '/at ddaw aot sdvy rfjv
'/Xyqnvofiiav aov, '/at rfjv '/ardaysaiv aov rd niqara Tj]g yfjg."
Kat ndXiv Xiysi nqdg airdv "Kddov ix ds^icHv fiov, ewg av ^w
Tot'g i'ytdqovg aov hnonddiov reiv noddv aov." See also c. 16. 2.
(Heb. i. 3, 5, 7, 13; and viii. 1.)
C. 45. 2. Eyxs'/icpare elg rdg yqacpdg rdg dXyOslg rdg 8id
' The thoughts in chapters 8, 9 and 12 of Clement, and the illustrations also,
closely correspond with those in Hebrews. 18

274 HEBREWS.
TOii nvevfiarog rov dyiov. 'Eniaraade (in oi8EV d8i'/nv ov8i
naqansnniyfiivnv yiyqanrai iv airalg. Oiy evqyaere 8i'/aiovg
ano^e§Xyfiivovg dnd baiwv dvdqcHv. 'Ediwyd-yaav 8i'/aioi, dXX'
vnd avdfiwv icpvXa'/iadyaav, aXX vnd avnalcov' sXtddadyaav
vnd naqavdficov dns'/rdvd-yaav dnd rdv fitaqdv '/at ddi'/nv ty
Xnv avsiXycpdrwv. Tavra ndayovrsg e^x^etug fyveyxav. &c. (Heb.
xi. 32-39.) C. 56. 2. 'AvaXd^wfiev naidsiav, icp' y oidstg dcpsiXst dyav-
a'/Tslv , ayanrjzoi. 'H vovdiryaig yv noioifisda sig dXXr'jXovg
'/aX'Tj ianv '/at vnsqdyav wcpiXtfiog' '/oXXd ydq fjfidg np deXyjian
rov Qeov. Ofjrwg ydq cpjOivb dying Xdyog' " Haidevcov Enai8-
svaiv fie b Kiqiog, xai rep davdrcp oi naqi8co'/iv fie. °0v ydq
ayand Kvqiog nai8svsi, fiaanyol 8i ndvra vldv ov naqadi'yerai."
(Ps. cxviii. 17; Prov. iii. 12.) . . . BXinere, dyanyrot, ndaog
vneqaaniOfidg iartv rolg naidevofisvoig vnd rov dsandrov' na
rfjq ydq dyaddg wv naidsvsi sig rd vnvdsrydrjvai fjfidg did rfjg
baiag naiSsiag airov. (Heb. xii. 5, &c.)
Jerome, Be Vir. III. c. 15. Clemens scripsit ex persona Ro
manae Ecclesiae, ad Ecclesiam Corinthiorum valde utilem episto
lam, quae et in nonnullis locis pubhce legi tur; quae mihi vi
detur characteri epistolae, quae sub Pauli nomine ad Hebraeos
fertur, convenire. Sed et multis de eadem epistola, non solum
sensibus, sed juxta verborum quoque ordinem abutitur. Omnino
grandis in utraque similitude est.
Second Epistle. *
C. 11. 6. "i2ffTe, dSsXcpoi fiov, fifj 8tipvxwfisv, dXXd sXniaavrsg
vnoftsivwfisv, tva xat rdv fitaddv '/Ofiiadfisda. Htardg ydq
iartv o snayystXdfisvog rdg dvrtfiiadiag dnodtSdvai sr/dani)
Tfuv e'loywv aizov. (Heb. x. 23. Comp. Mat. xvi. 27; Rom. ii. 6.)
3. Ignatius.^
« Compare as Echo: C. 13, 3 (Heb. v, 12,)
> Ignatius, Compare as Echoes: — Eph, 15, 3, ouSev XavSaVEl x,T,X. (Heb, iv.
13); ibid. 16. 2, Tto'oto [JiaXXov x,T,X. (Heb, x. 28); Magnes, 8, 1, (at) TcXavaaSE x.t.X,
(Heb, xiii. 9),

POLYCARP. HERMAS. JUSTIN MARTYR. 275

4. Polycarp.
Philipp. c. 12. 1. Deus autem ct pater Domini nostri Jesu
Christi, et ipse sempiternus pontifex, Dei fihus, Jesus Christus,
acdificet vos in fide et veritate et in omni mansuetudine, et sine
iracundia et in patientia &c. et det vobis sortem et partem inter
sanctos suos. (Heb. iv. 14; vi. 20; vii. 3. Corapare Acts xx. 32
and viii. 21.)
5. Hermas. ^
Vis. III. 9. 7. Nvv ovv vfilv Xiyw rolg nqnqyovfiivoig rqg
i'/'/Xqaiag xai Toig nqcozn'/aOsdqiraig' Mfj yivsads 'dfiotoi rolg
cpaqfiaxolg.
6. Justin Martyr.
Apol. I. 60. p. 93 B. (Comp. ibid. 12. p. 60 A.)
Lbid. 63. p. 95 B. Kat dyysXog di '/aXslrai '/at dndaroXog.^
(Heb. iii. 1.)
Bial. c. 13. p. 229 B. HdXat rovro e-/s1vo rd awrfjqiov Xov
rqov yv, 0 sins (sc. 'Haa'iag), to TOig fisrayivda'/ovai '/at fiy/in
aiftaai rqdywv yt.at nqo^dnov y OTCodip dafidXscog 'fj asfiiddXsiog
nqoacpoqalg '/adaqttofiivoig dXXd niazet did rov atfiazog rov
Xqiarov. (Heb. ix. 13, 14.)
Ibid. c. 96. p. 323 C. Kat alwvtov rov Qeov leqia xai /?a-
aiXia '/at Xqtardv jiiXXovza yivsadat.
Ibid. c. 113. p. 340 B. Ovrdg ianv 6 '/ard tijv Ta^iv MsX-
Xiae8i'/ §aatXsvg ^aX-qfi xat alwvtog Isqevg vipiarov vndqywv.
(Heb. V. 9, 10; vi. 20; vii. 12.)
' Hermas, Comp, Mand. XI. 12, Ttpurov p,£v o" avipo):to; ^xcCvo; o' Soxuv
TCVEiJfia ^x^it vilioi EauTov xa'i S^Xei TrpuToxaSeSpiav ?xeiv. The reference (Vis.
III. 9) apparently intimates that those who were preeminent in the church needed
to be warned against contention and the evils which dissension brings, (Comp,,
as to Pharisees, Mat. xxiii. 6,) Prominence or eminence in the congregation is
denoted by TCpuToxaSeSpiToi; — see the reference in Mand, XI. 12 — but it does
not seem to have any exclusive bearing on ojficiat prominence. It might he so
cial, or merely personal. In Heb, xiii, 7. 17 the word is irJYo\j|jiEvoi and seems to
have a general reference to ecclesiastical rule, as probably T:poif)Y. has here. See
also Vis. II, 2; 1 Clem. 21, 6. 13, For Hermas' lists of church officials see Vis.
HI, 5. 1 ; Sim. IX. 15. 25, He sets preaching in a prominent position, especially
in Sim, IX, 25.
' Justin. Only iu Hebrews is Christ called aTCo'oToXo;, and Justin uses the
word thrice in c. 60; besides once in c. 12, 18*

276 HEBREWS.
7. Syriac and Old Latin Versions. Muratorian Canon. ^
(See before. Section I.)
8. Irenaeus.
B. II. 30. 9. Solus hic Deus invenitur, qui orania fecit, solus
omnipotens, et solus pater condens et faciens omnia, et visibiha,
et invisibilia, et sensibilia, et insensata, et coelestia, et terrena,
"verbo virtutis suae." (Heb. i. 3.)
B. IV. 11. 4. Quae (raunditiae exteriores) in figurara fu-
turorura traditae erant, velut urabrae cujusdara descriptionera
faciente lege, atque delineante de temporalibus aeterna, de ter-
renis coelestia. (Heb. x. 1; viii. 5; ix. 23. Comp. Col. ii. 17.)
B. V. 5. 1. Onov ye Evwy evaqearfjaag np Qeip, iv adfian
fiereridy, tijv fierddeatv rdv dtxat'wv nqofiyvviov. (Heb. xi. 5.)
Eus. H. E. V. 26. 'AXXd ydq nqdg rolg dnododelatv Elqy-
vaiov avyyqdfifiaat '/at ralg iniaroXalg, cpiqsrai . . . '/at ^i^Xiov
Tl diaXs^swv diacpdqwv, iv Cj) rfjg nqdg 'E^qaiovg intaroXfjg '/at
rfjg Xeyofiivyg SoXofidJVTog Aocpiag fivrjfiovsvst , qrjzd nva i^
avrdv naqadsfisvog.^
> Syr., Old Lat, and Mur, Can, The Epistle is not named in the Muratorian
Canon; unless it be glanced at in the "forged Epistle to the Alexandrians,"
See note on page 7. — In the Syriac it follows Timothy and Titus, from which
position some have supposed that the compilers of the Canon did not accept it
as Paul's, or they would have put it before the letters to individuals. But others
say that it was put there because anonymous. The Old Latin Canon contained
it in Tertullian's time (see below, page 278), In the Vatican MS (cod. B) there
is a peculiarity. The Epistle to the Hebrews comes after Thessalonians (as it
does in s. A, C), but in the numbers upon the leaves Gal. ends with 58, Hebrews
begins with 59, and Ephesians begins with 70. It thus appears that in the ex
emplar from which B was copied Hebrews was so placed as to show that it was
ascribed to Paul, The MS ends with Heb, ix, 11, but the section is 64,
' Irenaeus nowhere quotes or refers to Hebrews in his book against Her
esies. This passage in Eusebius is therefore the only evidence that he used it;
but Eus, does not say that Irenaeus ascribed it to Paul, On the other hand Pho
tius cod. 232 quotes from Stephen Gobar (sixth century) a statement: oti 'Itczo-
XuTo; xai Eiprivaio; tiqv itpo; '.Eppaiou; £tciotoXtiv IlauXou, o\jx £xe£vou E^vaitpaai.
KXifi(jnQ; |x£vToi xa\ EiJaE'^io;, xal tioXu; aXXo; Ttov SEotpopuv rcaT^ptov o|j.iXo;,
Tat; aXXai; auvapi3(xoOat TauTTjv ^tciotoXoi;, xa£ cpaaiv auTniv ^x TTfj; "EppaifSo;
|j.ETa9paaai tov 4ipifip,£vov KXtjfjiEVTa. Photius says that Hippolytus in his Ciiurch-
History said: iq itpo; 'ESpatou; ^tciotoXii oux ^oti tou aTCoaroXovi IlauXou, All
this seems somewhat to qualify Jerome's statement (see below) that all the Greek
and Oriental authors accepted the Epistle as Paul's. But indeed he qualifies it
hiraself by saying that many of them ascribed it to Barnabas or to Clement,

PANTAENUS. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. 277

9. Pantaenus.
Eus. H. E. V. 14. (See below, under Clera. Alex., where o
fia'/dqing nqeafiireqng is Pantaenus.)

10. Clement of Alexandria. ^
Eus. H. E. VI. 13. Kiyqyzai {KX-fjfiyg) d' iv airolg {^rqw-
fiarevaiv) '/at ralg dnd nov dvziXeyofiivwv yqacpiov fiaqrvqiaig,
rfjg re Xeyofiivqg SoXofiiovrng 2ocpiag, '/at rfjg 'iqaov rnv 2iqdy,
'/at rfjg nqdg 'E^qaiovg intaroXfjg, rfjg re Baqvd^a -/at
KXfjfievrng '/at 'lovda.
Ibid. VI. 14. 7£ai tjjv nqdg 'EjSqainvg iniaroXyv, HavXov
fiiv eivai cpqat, yeyqdcpdai di 'E(iqaioig 'E^qai'/y cpwvfj, Anv/dv
8i cpiXnrifiwg airyv fiedeqfiyvevaavra i'/8ovvai rolg "EXXyaiv, 'odev
rdv avrdv yqdra evqia'/eadat ~/ard tjjv sqfiyvsiav TatiTJ^g rs rqg
iniarnXijg '/at rdv Hqd^ewv fifj nqnyeyqdcpdai ds rd "HavXog
anoaroXog," sl'/nnog- 'Ej-iqainig ydq, cpyaiv, intariXXcov, nqn-
Xyxpiv slXycpdat xar avrov '/at vnnnrsvnvatv airdv, avvsrdg naw
ov/ iv aqyjj anirqexpsv avrovg rd ovofia dsig. Eira vnn^dg snt-
Xiysf ""H8y 8i dg 6 fia'/dqing s'Xeye nqea^vreqog,'^ inei
b Kvqtog dndaroXog cov roi navro'/qdroqog dneardXq nqdg
'E^qaiovg, did fierqtdrqra b HavXng, tSg av eig rd s'dvq dnearaX-
fiivog, nix iyyqdcpei savrdv 'E^qaiwv dndaroXov, did re tjjv nqdg
rov Kvqiov rifiyv, 8id de rd ex nsqiovaiag '/at rolg E^qainig
iniariXXstv, idvcov '/rjqv/a 'dvra '/at dndaroXov."
Phot. cod. 232. (See before, p. 276. Note on Irenaeus.)
Adumbrat. in 1 Petr. Epist. (See above. Acts, page 202.)
Strom. B. VI. 8. p. 771. 'EjcsI xat HavXog iv ralg iniaro
Xalg oi cpiXoaocpiav dta^dXXwv cpaivsrai, rdv 8i rov Ivwanxov
fisraXafi^dvovra vxpovg oi'/irt naXtv8qofislv d^tol int rfjv 'EXXy-
' Clement gives no Catalogue of his Canonical books in his extant works,
but the two passages of Eusebius partly supply the want. It appears (from Eus,
H, E, VI. 14, see page 74) that he commented on Hebrews, and his own explicit
testimony (Strom. VI, 8, p, 771) is that Paul was the author. He quotes the
Epistle as xaTot Tov Seiov (xtcd'otoXov (Strom. II. 2, p, 433), tp-f)a\v o ctitoaToXo;
(ibid, 4, p. 434),
2 See the previous words of this passage p, 74, The part given here sup
plies the whole gap between ^mOToXiiv and AuSi; on p, 75. The blessed Pres
byter is Pantaenus, as appears from Eus, H. E. V. 11; VI. 13,

278 HEBREWS.
vi'/fjv " cpiXnaocpiav arotxsla rnfj y.nafinv" r airyv aXXyynqdv arnt-
ysiwnxfjv nva ovaav '/at nqonai8siav rfjg dXydsiag. Aid '/at rnig
'E^qaioig yqdcpcov rnig inavaxdfircrnvaiv sig vdfiov ex niarscog
"''Tj ndXiv," cpyat, "yqeiav sysre rnv 8i8da'/SLv vfidg riva rd arot-
ysla ryg dq'yfjg Ttliv Xoyiwv rov Qsnv '/at ysynvars "yqsiav s'ynvrsg
ydXa'/rog xai oi arsqsdg rqocpfjg." 'Qaairwg '/at rolg i^ 'EXXy-
vcov iniarqicpnvai KoXnaaasvai' "^Xinsrs frrj rig vfidg s'azat b
avXaywywv did zyg cpiXnaocpiag xat ~/svyg dndryg, '/ard tjjv naqd
doaiv rdv dvdqdnwv '/ard rd aroiysla rov '/da finv rnvrov, '/at
ov '/ard Xqiardv" 8eXsdtwv avdig eig cpiXoaocpiav dva8qafisiv,
rfjv arotysicody 8i8aa'/aXiav. (Heb. v. 12; Col. ii. 8.)
Lbid. B. IL. 22. p. 501. "'Enid v finv fisv 8i s'/aarnv vficov rqv
avrfjv iv8Ei'/vvadai anov8fjV nqdg ryv nXyqocpoqiav rfjg iXni.8og^'
scog "'/ard rfjv rd^iv MsXyiasdi'/ dqyisqsvg ysvdfisvog eig tov al
dva. " Td bfioia np HavXcji '/at y navdqsrng aocpia Xiyst. (Heb. vii.)
11. Tertullian.^
Be pudicit. c. 20. Disciplina igitur apostolorura proprie qui
dem instruit ac determinat principaliter sanctitatis oranis erga
teraplura Dei antistitem et ubique de ecclesia eradicandum omne
sacrilegium pudicitiae, sine ulla restitutionis mentione. Volo ta
raen ex redundantia alicujus etiara comitis apostolorum testimo
nium superducere, idoneum confirmandi de proxirao jure disci-
plinara raagistrorura. Extat enira et Barnabae titulus ad He
braeos, a Deo satis auctorati viri, ut quem Paulus juxta se con-
stituerit in abstinentiae tenore: Aut ego solus et Barnabas non
haberaus operandi potestatera ? (1 Cor. ix. 6.) Et utique receptior
1 Tertullian, This is the only passage in Tertullian where Hebrews is ex
pressly quoted. It comes after a series of quotations (13-18) from the Pauline
Epistles, and the Apocalypse and 1 John ; to which the first words Disciplina
igitur apostolorum apply. He elsewhere censures Marcion (Adv, Marc. V, 20) for
excluding the Pastoral Epistles : but does not blame him for excluding Hebrews.
The passage (Heb. vi, 4-8) here quoted is so much in his favour at the time (he
was a Montanist when he wrote it) that his not claiming Pauline authorship or
apostolical authority for the Epistle (it is by a comes apostolorum) must be re
garded as specially significant. He even emphatically distinguishes between the
apostolical writings {disciplina ¦magistrorum) and this letter (which is only de proximo
jure). The Muratorian Canon, the Old Latin, Irenaeus, Caius, and Tertullian show
us how little favour the idea of tho Paulino authorship of this Epistle found in
the Western Church, On what ground TeftuUian ascribed it to Barnabas is not
known.

GAIUS. HIPPOLYTUS. 279
apud ecclesias epistola Barnabae illo apocrypho Pastore raoecho-
rura (i. e. Herraas). Monens itaque discipulos oraissis omnibus
initiis ad perfectionera magis tendere nec rursum fundamenta
poenitentiae jacere ab operibus mortuorum, impossibile est enira,
inquit, eos, qui semel inluminati sunt et donura caeleste gusta
verunt et participaverunt Spiritura Sanctura et verbura Dei dulce
gustaverunt, occidente jara aevo quum exciderint, rursus revocari
in paenitentiara, refigentes cruci in seraetipsos filiura Dei et de-
decorantes. . . . Hoc qui ab apostolis didicit, et cura apostolis
docuit, nunquara moecho et fornicatori secundara paenitentiara
promissara ab apostolis norat. Optime enim legera interpreta-
batur, et figuras ejus jam in ipsa veritate servabat.
12. Caius (about a.d. 200).
Eus. H. E. VI. 20. ^HXds 8s sig fjfidg xat latnv Xnyiwrdrov
av8qdg dtdXoyng, int 'Pdfiyg xai Zscpvqlvnv nqdg Hqd'/Xnv rrjg
'/ard Oqvyag alqiascog vnsqfia'ynvvza '/s'/ivq fiivog' iv cp rdv dt
ivavriag rfjv nsqt rd awrdrreiv xaivag yqacpdg nqnnireidv re
'/at roXfiav iniarofiitwv. Twv rov leqov dnoardXov de'/azqicov
fiovwv iniaroXiov fivyfinvevei , tjjv nqdg 'E^qaiovg fiq avvaqtdfirj-
aag ralg Xomalg' inet xai etg devqo naqd 'Ptofiaiwv naiv nv
vofiiterat rov drcoardXav sivat.^
13. Hippolytus. 1
ritpl avaaTa(T£6)? (Lagarde p. 89). Aid rot rovrn 8L8da/iofisv
'/at naqsyyvdfisda ndai TOj)g iizta'/dnovg '/at didaO'/dXovg
fjfiibv, nsidsadai airovg '/at vno'/vnrsiv rolg Xdyoig avrdv.
' Caius. See before, Epistles of Paul, page 210. Photius says (cod. 48) of
Caius: Kal xaTct LIpoxXou 6e aitou6aoTovi MovTavou (j::ouSaiav SiaXs^iv auvTErax^-
vai, £v f) Tpl; xal S^xa (jidva; ^raOToXa; apii)ij,£iTai ElauXou oux i'iv.phuii tt^v
Tcpd; 'EjJpafou;. It appears that Caius did not reckon the Epistle to Hebrews
among Paul's genuine Epistles, because the Montanists (tii; ^'T^o. ^puya; alp^a-
EU;) quoted it on their side. In this way Caius may be supposed to express
along with the Muratorian Canon the unfavourable judgement of the Roman Church
at the close of the second century.
' Hippolytus, Compare as Echoes: 'AiroSeiKTiK'fi irpbs 'Ioii8o£oi;s (Lagarde
p, 64) • "E^(o TYJ; tiuXki; (Heb, xiii, 12) ; Els t^v 2uo-dvvav (Lagarde p. 149),
'EjJinEOErv e£; Ta; X^'P"? '^"'^ &tm (Heb. x, 31).

280 HEBREWS.
Airot ydq dyqvnvovaiv vniq Tttiv xpvydv viidv cog
Xdyov dnnddaovrsg. (Heb. xiii. 17.)
IIspl TT^ij cruvTsXeia? tou xoaixou (Lagarde p. 118). ^;?re nl
dndaroXot ol avy/a'/onadyaavrsg ..." deiJTe nl isqaqyat oi
Xsirovqyfpavrig fiot . . . dsvrs nl naiot nl "iv 'dqsat '/at
anyXaiaig '/at ralg dnaig rfjg yfjg aO'/yaavrsg.
(Heb. xi. 38.) 14. Origen. ^
Eus. H. E. VL 25. (See before, page 9.)
Epist. ad Afric. Tora. I. p. 19. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 65.) 'AXX'
slxng nqdg ravrd as CjjT^ffeiv ti 8ynors ni cpiqsrai naq' avroig
iv rip AavifjX y laroqia, sl, cog cpfjg, roiavra nsqt avrfjg ot ancpot
airdv naqa8i8naai. As'/rsnv 8i nqdg ravra, on baa 8s8vvqvrat
TWV nsqiaydvnov '/aryyoqiav nqsaSvriqwv, xat dqxdvnov, xat '/qi-
Twv, nsqtslXnv and rfjg yvdaswg rnv Xanv, wv nva adtsrat iv
ano'/qvcpoig. Kat rovrov naqddstyfia ddanfisv rd nsqi rdv Haatav
laroqnvfisva, xat vnd rfjg nqdg 'E^qaiovg 'EmarnXyg fiaqrvqnv-
fisva, iv ovdsvt rcov cpavsqiov ^i^Xicov ysyqafifiiva' nsqt ydq rcov
nqncpqnov dis^sqydfievng, '/al dv nendv&aaiv, 6 rfjv nqdg'Ejiqaiovg
yqdxpag cpyaiv. " EXiddadijOav, inqiad-qaav, iv cpdvoj fiayalqag
dicidavov." Hevadfieda ydq int riva dvacpiqyrai rd, "inqiady-
aav, " '/ard n sdog aqyaiov oi fidvov 'E^qar/nv, dXXd xat 'EXXy-
vi'/dv, nXydvvri'/wg Xsydfisvov nsqt svdg. Saqjsg d on al naqa-
ddasig Xiynvat nsnqiadat Haatav tov nqocpfjzqv xai ev tivi
dnn'/qvcpii) rovro cpiqsrat' 'dnsq rdya inirydsg vnd 'Invdaiwv qs-
qci8iovqyrjzai, Xi^sig nvdg rdg fifj nqsnnvaag^ naqsfijSs^Xq'/drwv
' Origen. See also the quotations from Origen pages 51, 52. Origen re
peatedly quotes it as Paul's; and says that there are fourteen Pauline Epistles.
In the Epistle to Africanus (A.D. 240) be intimates that he will prove that Paul
was the author. But in the passage from his Homily (after A.I). 245) quoted
by Eusebius (see page 9) he says that God only knows who wrote it. This last
many hold to be his mature judgement. See Westcott ou the Canon p. 330,
Bleek, Einl, in d, N, T,, § 193, p, 592 (Mangold's ed,). But the d ypa'+a? ¦^•'
^TCtaToXiQV may only mean the Amanuensis, This makes Origen consistent with
himself; and corresponds with the suggestion of Eusebius H. E. Ill, 38 (see be
low), Methodius (end of the third century) Bishop of Olympus in Lycia and
afterwards of Tyre (Jerome) seems to have ascribed the Epistle to Paul. He wrote
against Origen. See Lardner's citation of him, and Bleek's objections (Hebraer
§ 37), which last seem to be well-founded,
* Another reading is 7tpo3if)xouaa; . . . ?v' oXif) aTOCTTTjST).

ORIGEN. 281
ry- yqacpfj, 'iv' y oXy d^ziarydjj' dXX' sl'/dg Tiva dXifid fisvov dnd
rfjg sig ravra dnodsi^swg, avyyqfjaaadai np ^nvXyfian nov dds-
rnvvrwv rqv 'EniarnXfjv, wg oi HaiXiij yeyqafiftivqv nqdg ov dX
Xwv Xoywv '/ar I8iav yqqtojtev elg dnddei^iv rov eivai HaiXov
rfjv EniaroXfjv.
Be orat. Tom. I. p. 250. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 520.) HoXXd'/ig
de ;itot infjXdev anoqslv avy/qovovn 8io Xi^sig dnoaroXi'/dg,
ndg awriXeta aldvwv iariv, icp' rj dna^ elg ddiryatv rdv dfiaq
ricdv lyaovg necpaviqcorat, el fisXXnvatv sivat aldJvsg fisrd rnvrov
insqydfisvoi. "Eyovat 8i al Xi^sig airov ofJnog, sv ftiv rfj nqdg
Ei3qatovg' vvvt de dna^ snt awrsXsia rdv aliovwv eig
adiryaiv rwy dfiaqrtcov 8td rqg dvaiag airov nscpavi-
qiorai' iv 8i rjj nqdg 'Ecpsaiovg' tva ivdsi^yrat iv rolg
alcoat rolg insqyofiivotg rd vnsq^dXXov nXydog^ rijg
'ydqtrog avrov iv x?i?ffTOTjjTt icp' fjjidg. (Heb. ix. 26;
Ephes. ii. 7.)
In Numer. hom. 3. Tom. II. p. 281. (Migne, Vol. II. p. 596.)
Ipse ergo apostolorum maximus, qui sciret raultas esse non so
lum in terris, sed et in coelis Ecclesias, ex quibus et septem
quasdam Joannes enumerat: ipse tamen Paulus ostendere volens
esse quandam praeter eas etiam primitivorura Ecclesiara, dicit
ad Hebraeos scribens: "Non enim accessistis ad ardentem et
tractabilera ignera, sed accessistis ad raoutem Sion etc." (Heb.
xh. 18, &c.)
Comment, in Joann. t. 2. Tom. IV. p. 60. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 125.)
Kat iv rfj nqdg 'E^qaiovg, b airdg HavXdg cpyatv "'En saxd-
Tow rdv fjfisqdv iXdXyasv fjfilv iv Ylip, ov s'dy/s '/Xqqovdfiov ndv
rwv, dl ov '/at rovg aliovag inoiyas." (Heb. i. 1, 2.)
Comment, in Joann. t. 20. Tom. IV. p. 350. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 648.) Tovto ydq 'q8q xat 8o'/ifiov rqanstirov sqyov rvyydvsi,
ov riXsinv nvnfidtwv nix dv dfidqroi, '/at iv ry nqdg 'E§qaiovg
ysyqafiftivov rov- TsXsiwv di iart y arsqsd rqocpfj, nov
did rfjv s^iv rd ala dyrfjqta ysyvfivaa fiiva iyovrwv
nqdg did'/qtatv '/aXov rs '/at '/a'/ov. (Heb. v. 14.)
Comment, in Ep. ad Bom. B. VIL. Tom. IV. p. 599. (Migne,
Vol. IV. p. 1111.) Ipsos quoque angelos, si ad sententiam Pauli
s Another reading is uXouTo;.

282 HEBREWS.
respicias quae dicit, quia "oranes ministeriales sunt spiritus ad
ministeriura raissi propter eos qui haereditatem capiunt salutis,"
intelhges tale aliquid gerere, et huic corruptioni esse subjectos:
credo etiam ipsos non volentes, sed propter eum qui subjecit eos
in spe. (Heb. i. 14.)
Comment, in Ep. ad Bom. B. IX. Tom. IV. p. 659. (Migne,
Vol. IV. p. 1235.) Sicut et ipse apostolus in aliis dicit: "Perfecto-
rum autem est cibus, eorum qui pro possibilitate sumendi ex-
ercitos habent sensus ad discretionem boni et mali." (Heb. v. 14.)
15. Dionysius of Alexandria. ^
Eus. H. E. VI. 41. 'E^i'/Xtvov de '/at vnavs'ywqovv ol d8sX-
cpoi, xat rfjv aqnayfjv riov 'vnaqydvrcov, bfioicog sxsivotg otg '/at
HavXog ifiaqrvqyas, fisrd "yaqdg nqoasdi^avro. (Heb. x. 34.)
16. Cyprian.^
Be exhort, mart. c. 11. Et apostolus Paulus, qui hujus legi-
timi numeri et certi (sc. nura. septem) raeminit, ad septera eccle
sias scribit. Et in Apocalypsi Dominus mandata sua divina et
praecepta coelestia ad septem ecclesias scribit.
Adv. Jud. I. 20. Item in Regum primo: "Sterihs septem
peperit, et quae pluriraos habebat filios infirraata est." Filii
autera septem sunt ecclesiae septera. Unde et Paulus septera
Ecclesiis scripsit, et Apocalypsis Ecclesias septem ponit, ut ser
vetur septenarius numerus.
' Dionysius, See note on page 86, This testimony continues the history of
the opinions entertained in Alexandria regarding the Pauline authorship, Alex
ander, a successor in the bishopric of Alexandria about A,D. 312, says (Theodoret
H. E. I. 4) "SOjJitpuva yoijv toOtoi; poa xal d [iEyaXotpuvdTaTo; IlaOXoc, 9aax(0v
TiEpl auToG ¦ ov £'iif)X£ xXiQpovd}Jiov TiavTtov, 8i' ou xal Toi; aitova; ^Ttodfjasv," (Heb,
i. 2,) When we add to these the strong testimony of Athanasius (see before,
page 15) it is clear that the testimony of the Alexandrian school (from Pantaenus
downwards) to the Canonicity of Hebrews is consistent, and definite, Origen
being the only (apparent) exception. On Origen see p. 280, note 1, Basilides
rejected it. His position may be compared to that of Marcion in this respect,
' Cyprian, Though Cyprian had many opportunities of quoting Hebrews, he
never quotes it, and he quotes all the other Pauline letters save Philemon. The
passages in our text restrict Paul's letters to those addressed to seven churches
i.e. Hebrews is not recognized. Along with the works of Cyprian is fouud a
Tractatus ad Novatianum liaereticum (author unknown) which does not allude to
this Epistle, though its quotations from other books of scripture are numerous.
So also the works of Novatian himself. Bleek (Hebraer) I. § 46.

eusebius. 283

17. Eusebius. 1
H. E. II. 17. Tdya 8' el'/dg, d cprjatv dqxaiiov naq' airolg
eivat avyyqdfifiara, rd re siayyiXia '/at rdg nov dnoardXcov yqa
cpdg Styyrjastg ri nvag xard rd sl'/dg TtJv ndXai jiqocprjziov sq-
firjvsvzixdg, bnolag rj re nqdg 'E^qaiovg '/at dXXai nXeiovg rov
HavXov neqtiyovaiv iniazoXat, ravra sivai.
Ibid. III. 3. (See before on the Epistles, page 207.)
Ibid. III. 37. . . . '/at rnv KXrjfisvrng iv tj dvwfioXoyqjisvy
naqd ndatv, qv ex nqoawnov nov 'Pwfiaicov s-/'/Xqaiag ry Ko
qivdiwv dtsrvndaaro, iv jj rfjg nqdg 'E^qainvg noXXd voqfiara
naqad-slg, y8y 8i '/ai airoXe^et qqrolg naiv s^ airfjg xQyOf^Jt^-
vng, aacpiaraza naqiarqaiv on fiq viov vndqysi rd avyyqaftfia.
"Evdev el'/drwg e'do^ev aird rolg Xoinolg sy/araXe'ydfjvai yqdfi
fiaai rov anoaroXov. 'E^qa'ioig ydq did ryg narqinv yXwrrqg
syyqdcpcog dfitXy/drng rnv HavXnv, ol ftiv rdv siayysXiaryv Aov-
xav, 01 di rdv KXyjievra rovrov avrdv sqfiyvevaai Xiyovai rfjv
yqacprjv. 0 '/at fidXXov s'iy dv aXyd-ig, rq) rdv Ofiotov T^g cpqd
aswg yaqa'/rfjqa rrjv rs rov KXyftsvrog iniazoXyv, '/at rfjv nqdg
E^qaiovg anoadteiv, '/at np fifj nd^qco rd iv sxariqoig rolg avy-
yqafifiaat vnyfiara '/adeardvai.
Lbid. VI. 13. (See before, under Clera. Alex.)
Be martyr. Pal. c. 11. 'E'/eivqv dfjza vncov neqt ^g e'lqqrai
rip HavXio ' y di dvw 'leqovaaXyfi iXevdiqa iartv, ^ig effTiv fcq-
rqq fjfidv '/at nqoaeXyXidare 2icov 'dqei, '/at nnXet Qenv tdvrog,
'IsqovaaXfjfi innvqavicij. (Heb. xii. 22.)
Praepar. Ev. 12. 19. Tov rs Isqov Xdyov aacpiarsqov slndv
rog' "O'invsg vnodsiyfian '/at a'/id iXdrqsvnv rdv snnvqavicov."
(Heb. vni. 5.)
Bemonstr. Ev. b. 3. 'End'/nvanv 8s oia '/at nsqt Twvde 6 a^ro'-
aroXdg cpqatv, iv cp nsqiaadrsqov ^nvXdfievng 6 ©eog inidel^ai
rolg '/Xqqnvdfioig Tjjg (iaaiXsiag rd dfierddernv rqg jinvXfjg airnv,
ifiealrevaev 'nq'/cj), tva did dvo nqayfidrcov dfieradirwv, sv olg
aSvvarnv xlisraaadat Qsdv, layvqdv naqd'/Xyaiv t'^cofiev nl nqo-
'/aracpvydvveg, '/qarqaai rfjg nqo'/eifiivqg iXni8ng. (Heb. vi. 16-18.)
' Eusebius shows (H. E, III, 25) that while he was well aware of the contro
versies regarding the authorship and Canonicity of the Epistle, he himself admitted
it as Paul's, though (III, 27) speaking of Clement or Luke as its translator.

284 HEBREWS.
Theodoreti argum. in Ep. ad Heir. Vol. III. p. 393 (Paris
1642). 'E^ ov ydq nov dnoarnXi'/dv yqajifidrcov al rnv Qsov
fisriXayov i'/'/Xyalai, s^ i'/sivov vmI rfjg nqdg 'E^qaiovg iniaroXrjg
TJJV wcpiXeiav '/aqnovvrai. El de fiy8i rovro I'/avdv nelaai av
rovg, Eiae^iij) yovv syqfjv nsiadrjvai np HaXaiartvip, ov rdv ol-
•xsicov doyfidrwv dno'/aXoiai awqyoqov. Kat ovrog ydq rov dsto-
rdrov HavXov r'yv8s rfjv iniaroXyv wfioXdyyasv slvai , '/at rovg
naXaiovg dnavrag ravryv nsqt airyg scpyasv iayq'/svat rfjv do^av.
Photii cod. 232. (See before, Note 1 on Irenaeus, page 276.)
18. Athanasius. 1
Canon of Athanasius, see before p. 13.
Be Becretis Nicenae Synodi c. 17. Vol. I. p. 223. (Migne,
Vol. I. p. 453.) '0 de 'AnoaroXog ^Xincov rfjv yslqa, rfjv aocpiav,
rdv Xdyov, airdv 'dvra rdv Yldv, cpqat' HoXvfisqdg '/at noXvrqd-
nwg ndXat b Qsdg XaXyaag rolg jcavqdatv iv rolg nqocpfjratg'
in' iaydrov riov yfisqUxv rovrwv sXdXyasv fjfiiv sv Yl^, ov sdy/sv
xXyqovdfiov ndvrwv, 8i' ov xat inoiijas rovg aldvag' xat ndXiV
Etg Kvqiog 'lyaovg Xqiardg, dt' ov rd ndvra, xat fjfislg dt av
rov. (Heb. i. 1, 2.)
lUd. c. 18. Vol. I. p. 224. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 456.) '0 fiiv
ydq fiaxdqtog HavXog iv ry nqdg 'E^qaiovg cprjaiv Hiarsi voov-
fisv '/aryqriadai rovg aldvag qyfian Qsov, sig rd fifj ex cpatvn-
f tivwv rd §Xsnd fisvov ysyovivat. (Heb. xi. 3.)
Ibid. c. 19. Vol. I. p. 225. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 449.) 'AfiiXet
rd ndvra Xiywv b HavXog ex rov Qeov, eidvg en'yyaye' Kat etg
Kvqiog 'lyaovg Xqtarog, 8t' ov rd ndvra' 'iva 8ei^y ndaiv, oti
a^^og fiiv iartv 6 Ytog ndvrwv rcov ix rov Qeov y svo fiivwv.
(Heb. i.) 19. Cyril of Jerusalem.
Catechis. IV. (See before, p. 19.)
20. Epiphanius.^
Haeres. I. t. 2. h. 26. p. 98. Jlo'ffa de a'^^a effTiv einelv, dg
1 Athanasius, References to Benedictine ed. 1598,
' Epiphanius. In addition to Cyril and Epiphanius many other testimonies

epiphanius. THEODORET. 285
TOV AnoaroXov Xiyovrog' fj fiiv dyafing '/at fj naqdivog fieqifivd
rd mi:' Kvqiov, ncog dqiaei np Kvqiii). (1 (^or. vii. 34.) Tovro
de cpyat 8El^ai tjjv dyvsiav iv dXydsicj ex rov dyiov Hvsvfiarog
sn IT qs7T,o fisvog oi naqiqywg. 'Eneira de nsqt rdv rdv ydfinv
i'ydvnov rdv asfivdv Xiyst' Tifiing 6 ydfing, '/at fj '/oiry dfiiavzog,
ndqvovg di xat fioryovg '/qivsl 6 ©eo'g. (Hob. xiii. 4.)
Haeres. L. t. 3. h. 42. p. 373. Ot;'Twg ydq naqd np Maqxlwvt
'/slrat {i.e. Philemon as the ninth, between Colossians and Phi
lippians). Haqd 8i np'Anoan)X(i) io'ydzy '/elrai' sv nat 8i dv
nyqdcpoig Tqig'/at8E'/dry nqd rfjg nqdg 'E^qaiovg rsGaaqea'/atds-
'/arqg rira'/rai ' dXXa de dvriyqacpa t'yst rfjv nqdg 'E^qaiovg de-
'/drqv nqd TtDv dvo nov nqdg Tifiddenv, xat Tirov, '/at (DiXfjfiova.
Haeres. LL. t. 2. h. 69. p. 760. Kat nqdrov ftiv rfjv 'Entaro-
Xfjv ravrrjv, rqv nqdg 'E§qaiovg cpyfit, {Ol'Aqsiavot) dncodofJVTai,
cpvaei airfjv avaiqovvzeg dnd rov 'AnoardXov , '/at Xiyovreg fiy
eivai rov avrov.
Haeres. LLL. t. 1. h. 70. p. 815. 'Afia di'/at fisqiafiovg I'yst'
Qedg di dfiiqtardg ian. Oyat ydq 6 'AnoaroXog' Zwv ydq 6
Xnyng rov Qeov, , '/at iveqyfjg, '/at^ rofidreqog vniq ndaav fidyatqav
diarofiov, '/at 8ti'/vovfievog fiixqt fisqiOfiov xpvxqg "^^l fivsXdv xat
'xqiri'/dg ivdvfiyascov, '/at ivvoidv. Kat oix san '/riatg dcpavfjg
ivdniov airov, xat rd s^fjg.
Haeres. IIL t. 1. h. 76. p. 941. (See above, p. 21.)
21. Theodoret.
Lnterpret. Ep. ad Hebr. Argum. Vol. III. p. 393 (Ed. Paris
1542). Qavfiaardv oidiv dqwatv ol rfjv 'Aqetavixyv elade^dfievot
vdaov, xard twv dnoaroXi'/dv Aj;TTWvTeg yqafifidrwv, xat tjjv nqdg
'E^qaiovg iniaroXyv rdiv Xoindv dno'/qivovrsg, '/at vddov ravrqv
of Eastern writers might be cited. From the fourth century it is with increasing
cordiality recognized as Paul's. Thus the Laodicene Council (see before, p. 18),
in the decree which may be ascribed to about this time, numbers fourteen Epistles
of Paul; Gregory of Nazianzum (died 389) says 8£xa Ss lloOXou TE'aaapE'; t' £iTt-
aroXat, Amphilochius of Iconium, contemporary of Gregory, says that Paul wrote
Hebrews, and that some who call it vdUov are men oux £u XsyovTE;" f-^T^aia yap
IQ X'^P'^- "^^^ Apostolical Canons count fourteen Epistles of Paul ; and Basil the
Great (died 379) and his brother Gregory of Nyssa distinctly ascribe it to Paul,
Chrysostom (died 407) not only often quotes the Epistle as Paul's, but even dis
cusses questions concerning it, without once alluding to any doubt of Paul being
the author. See Bleek (Hebraer) I, §§ 41. 42,

286 HEBREWS.
ajTOxaXotlvTeg. Ol ydq '/ard rov Qsnv '/at awryqng yfidv rdg
yXdrrag '/tvovvrsg ri oi'/ dv roXfiqaatsv '/ard rdv svvwv avrov
xat fisyaXocpcovwv T^g dXydsiag '/yqvxwv; airov ydq iazi znv 8e-
aitdrov cpwvy: El 'sfii id iw^av, '/at vfidg dtw^ovaiv. E8sl
8i airnvg, sl '/at fiy8iv szsqov, rnfj "yqnvnv ynvv alSsadfjvai rd
fifj/ng, iv cp ryv8e rfjv iniarnXfjv iv ralg i'/'/Xyaiatg avayivio-
a'/nvreg 8iersXsaav rfjg i'/'/Xyaiag nl rqdcpifiot. E^ ov ydq nov
'AnoaroXixcov yqafifidnov al rov Qsov fisriXayov i/'/Xya'iat, s^
i'/eivov xat rfjg nqdg 'E^qaiovg hciaroXyg rfjv wcpiXeiav '/aqnovv
rai' el di fiydi rovrn ixavov nelaai airnvg, Eiae^icj) yovv hyqfjv
nsiadfjvat np HaXaianvip, ov reiv nl'/siwv 8nyfidTcov annxaXnvat
awrjyoqov '/at ovrog ydq rov dsiordrnv HavXov ryv8s rfjv int-
aroXfjv cofioXdyyaev eivai, '/at rovg naXatovg dnavrag ravryv neqt
airfjg scpyasv iayy/ivat rfjv dd^av. 'AXX' ovrot ndatv i^qdadat
cpqdaavrsg, dvai8yv nqdg rfjv dXqdetav diaftd'yovrat, rfjg 'Ano-
aroXi'/qg denXnyiag, rj rn nqooifttov '/are'/dafiqae, rfjv cxiyXyv ov
cpiqnvreg. 'AvnXiyeiv ydq oi 8vvdfievoi nqdg rd dia^qrjSyv neqt
rfjg rov fiovoyivovg slqqfiiva dsdrrjrog, ndaav i'/^dXXetv erdXfiy-
aav TJJV iniaroXyv, '/airot '/at rcov doyfidrwv, '/at riov aXXwv iv-
dvfiyfidrwv, rrnXXfjv avyyiveiav nqdg rdg dXXag iydvzwv iniaro
Xdg. Hqda'yyfia di rfj '/arrjynqiq neqindiaai, rd fifj rqv 'Ano-
aroXi'/yv nqoayyoqiav bfioiwg iy/eladai np nqootfiic^. "E8ei de
airovg avvi8slv, wg rcov i§ idvcov, dXX' oi twv e^ 'loSaiwv ns-
niarev'/drwv 'AndarnXng i-/exeiqordvrjro. . . . rovrov dfj xdqiv rolg
fiiv i^ idvdv nentarev/daiv iniariXXwv , '/at rfjv nqoaqyoqiav
nqoaridstxs, '/at rfjv AnoaroXt'/fjv a^iav nqoaridetxev , wg 8i-
8daxaXog jiadyralg iniariXXwv. 'E^qaioig de yqdcpwv, wv oi'/
i.vsysiqiady rfjv intfiiXsiav , yvfivfjv rdv a^iwfiarcov sl'/orwg rrjv
8i8aa'/aXiav nqoa'qvsyxsv. 'Ynd ydq rfjv rdiv dXXcov anoardXwv
nqofiydsiav iriXovv. "Ort di rfjg nvevfiari'/yg ydqirog dvdnXsiog
y iniaroXfj, '/at oiSi tjjv rvynvaav naqiynvaa 8ia§nXyg dcpnqjifjv,
fj '/ard fiiqog sqfiyvsia 8i8d^Et aacpiareqov. . . . Fiyqacpe 8i
airyv rfj 'E^qaiwv cpwvy' Eqfiyvevadyvat 8i airfjv cpaatv vnd
KX'fjfievrog.
22. Jerome. 1
Be Vir. III. c. 5. (See before. Epistles of Paul, p. 214.)
» Jerome's view on the whole is that the Pauline authorship was not beyond

JEROME. 287
Ad Paulin. de Stud. Script. (Vallars. Vol. I. c. 8. p. 278.)
Paulus Apostolus ad septem Ecclesias scribit, (octava enira ad
Hebraeos a plerisque extra nuraerura ponitur.)
Epist. ad Bardanum. (Vallars. Vol. I. c. 3. p. 965.) Illud
nostris dicendura est, hanc Epistolara quae inscribitur ad He
braeos, non solum ab Ecclesiis Orientis, sed ab omnibus retro
Ecclesiasticis Graeci sermonis Scriptoribus, quasi Pauli Apostoli
suscipi, licet plerique eam vel Barnabae, vel Clementis arbitren-
tur: et nihil interesse, cujus sit, quura Ecclesiastici viri sit, ct
quotidie Ecclesiarum lectione celebretur. Quod si eam Latino
rum consuetudo non recipit inter Scripturas canonicas; nec Grae-
corum quidera Ecclesiae Apocalypsin Joannis eadera libertate
suscipiunt; et tamen nos utruraque suscipimus; nequaquam hujus
temporis consuetudinem, sed veterura scriptorum auctoritatem
sequentes, qui plerumque utriusque abutuntur testimoniis, non
ut interdum de apocryphis facere solent, quippe qui et genti-
lium literarum raro utantur exeraplis, sed quasi canonicis et ec
clesiasticis. Comment, in Isaiae proph. iii. 6. (Vallars. Vol. IV. p. 91.)
Unde et Paulus Apostolus in epistola ad Hebraeos, quam Latina
consuetudo non recipit: "Nonne oranes," inquit, "ministri sunt
spiritus .&c.?"
Comment, in Ep. ad Tit. Prooem. (See above, on 1 Tim. p. 260.)
In Jerem. Book VL c. Bl. (Vallars. Vol. IV. p. 1074.) Hoc
testimonio Apostolus Paulus, sive quis alius scripsit Epistolam,
usus est ad Hebraeos.
Ln Matth. Book IV. c. 26. (Vallars. Vol. VIL p. 212.) Nam
doubt. He usually cites the Epistle as Paul's; but often expresses a doubt; and
this throughout his writings at all periods of his life. The quotation in the text
from his letter to Dardanus gives a fair view of his general position. His con
temporary Augustine testifies to the Pauline authorship on the whole. He was
present at the Council of Carthage A.D, 397 (see before, p, 20) at which it was
reckoned as Paul's, but separately from the thirteen. In one remarkable passage
(see before, p, 23) he counts fourteen Epp, of Paul, without question putting He
brews at tbe end. Though he does not always say the Ep, is Paul's, he does
not admit doubts of it further than might be inferred from such phrases as
" Epistola quae scribitur ad Hebraeos " or " Epistola ad Hebraeos." In his Ue
Peccat. merit, et remiss. I, c, 27 he says: "Ad Hebraeos quoque epistola, guam-
quavi nonnullis incerta sit . . . magisque me movet auctoritas Ecclesiai-um Onentalium,
quae hanc quoque in canonicis habent, qua-nta pro nobis testimonia contineat, adoer-
tenduTn est."

288 HEBREWS.
et Paulus in epistola sua, quae scribitur ad Hebraeos, licet de
ea raulti Latinorura dubitent &c.
Comm. in Ep. ad G-alat. (Vallars. Vol. VII. p. 374.) Unde et
nos possuraus intelligere, Joannem quoque baptistam et apostolum
appellandum, siquidera ait scriptura: "Fuit homo missus a Deo
cui nomen erat Joannes : " et in Epistola ad Hebraeos propterea
Paulum solita cousuetudine nec nomen suum, nec Apostoli voca-
bulum praeposuisse, quia de Christo erat dicturus: Habentes ergo
principem Sacerdotem, et Apostolum confessionis nostrae Jesum
(Heb. iii. 1 ; iv. 14) ; nec fuisse congruura, ut ubi Christus Apo
stolus dicendus erat, ibi etiara Paulus Apostolus poneretur.

289

XXVIL
THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES.^
1. Clement of Alexandria.
Strom. LV. 15. p. 606. Kard Tr^v iniaroXyv r-qv xadoXi'/yv
rdv annarnXiov dndvrwv "avv rjj eidn'/ia rov 'Aylov HvsvfiarQg"
TJJ yeyqafifiivy fiiv iv ralg Hqd^eai twv 'AnoardXwv, dia'/n-
fiiadeiay di elg rovg niaroig dt' airov 8ia-/ovovvTog rov HavXov.
Eus. H. E. VI. 14. 'Ev de Tatg vnorvndaeat, ^vveXdvra ei
nelv, ndayg .rfjg ivdiad-rj/nv yqacprjg intrsTfiyfiivag nsnoiyrai
dtyyqasig fiy8i rdg dvziXsyofiivag naqsXddv T'fjv 'Iov 8 a Xiyw '/at
rdg Xoindg xadoXrxdg iniaroXdg, tjjv rs Baqvd§a xat rfjv Hi
rqov Xsyofiivqv dno'/dXvxptv.

' The origin and meaning of the term Catholic are obscure. The seven
Epistles which are now so named are usually found in MSS of the New Testa
ment after the Acts and before the Pauline Epistles. In K they immediately
precede the Apocalypse, For much interesting information as to the relative order
in which they are severally found in MSS aud Catalogues see Volkmar's Anhang
to Credner's Geschichte, § 196. It appears from the following extracts that Cle
ment used the word "Catholic" to denote the general destination of the Epistle
in Acts XV ; aud that he (or Eusebius for him) had the same meaning in view
when speaking of Jude and the rest; Origen also (applying it to Barnabas and
some that are Canonical) has the same meaning (see reflf, in our text) ; and this
meaning seems to have prevailed ever since, Eus. H. E. III. 3, (see before,
page 207) does not necessarily give a different rendering, for i-) xaSoXixoi; Tcapa-
SfiSofxE'va may mean "handed down among Catholic Christians." Oecumenius
(Proleg, in Ep. Jacob.) says xaSoXixal Xe'yovTai auTai olovsl ify.-i-x.Xioi , which is
the same thing. The two smaller Epistles of John do not come under the name
of General Epistles, but they were at an early date supposed to be general; the
Elect lady and Gains being supposed to denote the Christian Church. Photius
says of Clement that his Stromateis are Interpretations " of the Epistles of the
divine Paul and the Catholic Epistles. " Cassiodorus (sixth ceutury), Div. Lit.
c, 8 (see below on 2 Peter under Clem, Alex,), applies the term Epistolae ca
nonicae to those Epistles, and this became the ordinary phrase in the Latin
Church: but this seems to intimate that they are uudoubtedly recognized by the
Church, and does not necessarily distinguish them from Paul's. Eusebius H. E.
II, 23 (see below, on Jaraes) was the first to treat them as a collection. 19

290 the catholic epistles.
3. Origen. 1
C. Celsum I. 63. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 777.) Fiyqanrat 8y iv
Tjj Baqvd^a '/adoXt'/jj sniaroX'jj.
Selecta in Psalm. (See below, 1 Pet.)
Comment, in Joann. (See below, 1 Pet.)
Be orat. (See below, 1 John.)
Comment, in Joann. (See below, 1 John.)
Comment, in Ep. ad Bom. (See below, Jude.)
Eus. H. E. VI. 25. (See before, p. 8.)
4. Dionysius of Alexandria.
Eus. H. E. VII. 25. 'H 'EniaroXy fj '/adoXv/'fj. (See below,
on the Apoeal.) 5. Eusebius.
H. E. II. 23. (See below, on Jaraes.)
Lbid. III. 3. (See before, "The Epistles," page 207.)
Ibid. VI. 14. (See before, on Clem. Alex., pages 74, 277.)
6. Epiphanius.
Haeres. 51. (See below, on the Apoeal.)
7. Jerome.
Prolog. 7. epist. canonic. (Vallars. Vol. X. p. 1057) Non idem
ordo est apud Graecos, qui integre sapiunt, et fidem rectam sec-
tantur, Epistolarura septem, quae Canonicae nuncupantur, qui in
Latinis Codicibus invenitur: ut, quia Petrus primus est in nu
mero Apostolorura, primae sint etiam ejus Epistolae in ordine
caeterarum. Sed sicut Evangelistas dudum ad veritatis lineam
correximus: ita has proprio ordini, Deo nos juvante, reddidiraus.
Est enira prima earum una Jacobi: Petri duae: Johannis tres:
et Judae una. Quae si, ut ab eis digestae sunt, ita quoque ab
* Origen. In the following passages Origen means "general" when he says
Catholic.

JEROME. 291
interpretibus fideliter in Latinum verterentur eloquiura, nec ara-
biguitatem legentibus facerent, nec sermonum sese varietas im-
pugnaret: illo praecipue loco ubi de unitate Trinitatis in prima
Johannis Epistola positum legiraus. In qua etiam ab infidehbus
translatoribus multum erratum esse a fidei veritate comperimus:
triura tantum vocabula, hoc est, aquae, sanguinis et spiritus, in
sua editione ponentes; et Patris, Verbique, ac Spiritus testirao
niura oraittentes: in quo raaxime et fides Catholica roboratur, et
Patris et Fihi ac Spiritus Sancti una divinitatis substantia com-
probatur. In caeteris vero Epistolis, quantum a nostra aliorum
distet Editio lectoris prudentiae derelinquo. Sed tu, virgo Christi
Eustochium, dum a me impensius Scripturae veritatem inquiris,
meam quodam modo senectutem invidorum dentibus coriodendam
exponis, qui me falsarium corruptoremque sanctarum pronuntiant
Scripturarum. Sed ego in tali opere nec aemulorum raeorum in-
videntiam pertiraesco: nec sanctae Scripturae veritatem poscen-
tibus denegabo.
Ad Paulin. de stud, script. (See before, p. 22.)

19^

292

xxvm.
JAMES.'
{compare sections i-iii)
1. Clement of Rosie.
First Epistle.
C. 10. 1, 7. 'A^qadfi, 6 cpiXog nqoaayoqsvdstg, niardg svqidy
sv rip avrdv vnfj/oov ysviad-at rolg qfjfiaat roi Qsov. . . . Aid
nianv '/at cpiXo^eviav idddy avnp vldg iv yfjqcf, '/at 8i i'jraxo^g
nqoafjveyxev airdv dvaiav rip Qeip nqdg 'sv rcov dqicov wv edet^ev
avrip. (James ii. 21-23.)
C. 12. 1. Atd nianv xai cptXo^sviav iawdrj 'Pad^ y ndqvq.
(James ii. 25; Heb. xi. 31.)
C. 17. 2. 'Efiaqrvqydy di fisydXcog A^qadfi '/at cpiXog nqoa-
yyoqsvdy rov Qsov. (James ii. 23.)
C. 23. 1. 'O olxriqfiwv xard ndvra '/at eieqyert'/dg narfjq
sy^t anXdyxva snt cpo^ovfisvovg airdv, yniwg rs '/at nqoaqvwg
rdg xaQtrag avrov dnodtdol rolg nqoaeqxofiivoig aircp dnXjj 8ta-
* This Epistle was accepted in the Eastern Church from the first. It is in
the Peshito version; but not in the Muratorian list; and not in the majority of
MSS of the Old Latin. The references given from Clem. Rom. are not very secure,
although some of them (especially perhaps c, 17, 2) may be kept in mind. It
seems impossible to doubt that Hermas had it in view; and the first passage
from Irenaeus is significant. About Origen there can be no doubt whatever as
regards the Epistle, although doubt may be thrown on the passages which identify
its writer with the Lord's brother, inasmuch as they are only in the Latin of
Rufinus, Nothing can be raade of Tertullian : but on the other hand Hippolytus,
in his solitary quotation, is significantly explicit, Eusebius tells as a matter of
fact that some counted it spurious, and that there was a lack of early testimony
to it ; hut he himself quotes it as Apostolic, He seems to have believed that
there were three of the name of James, famous in the early Church. This is a
subject much discussed, on which this is not the place to enter. It is more to
our purpose to draw the student's attention to the correspondence between James
and the Sermon on the Mount; and between James aud 1 Peter. This twofold
relation seems to point to James being oue of those who saw and heard the
Lord in the flesh. Both Jaraes and 1 Peter were addressed to the Jews of the
dispersion; and some have attributed to this fact the slowness of the Christian
Churches, especially in the West, to receive them. Perhaps in those days, as at
the Eeformation, its doctrine was supposed to conflict with that of St Paul,
Luther could not endure it. He called it "straw,"

CLEMENT. HEEMAS. 293
voiq. Aid fiy dtrpvydfisv, fiy8i lv8aXXiadw y xpvxy fjfidv int
_ralg vnsq^aXXoiaaig '/at sv8d^oig 8coqsalg airov. Hd^qw ysviadw
aip' fjficov fj yqacpfj afjry, 'dnov Xiyst' "TaXainwqoi slatv ol 81-
xpvxot, ol 8iaTdtovrsg ry xpvyjj, ol Xiyovrsg' Tavra fj/oiaafiev
xat ent rdv nariqwv fjfiiov, '/at l8ov yeyyqd'/afiev xat oi8iv fjfilv
rovrwv aw^i^rj/ev." 'ii dvdrjrnt, avfi^dXers savrovg ^vXci)' Xd-
/SeT£ dfinsXov nqdrov fiiv cpvXXoqnel, eira ^Xaardg yiverai, eira
cpvXXov, eira dvdog, xat fierd ravra 'oficpa^, eira aracpvXfj naq-
sary/vla.^ (Jaraes i. 5, 9; v. 7; 2 Pet. iii. 3, 4.)
C. 30. 1. 'Ayiov ovv fisqtg vndqyovrsg norqawfisv rd rov
dytaajiov ndvra, cpsvyovreg xaraXaXtdg, fiiaqdg re '/at dvdyvovg
avfinXo'/dg, fiidag re xat vewreqiafiovg '/at ^deXv/rdg entdvfiiag,
fivaeqdv fiotxeiav, ^deXvxrfjv vneqycpaviav. " ©eog ydq , " cpqatv,
"vneqycpdvotg dvnrdaaerai, raneivolg de 8i8watv ydqtv." * (James
iv. 2-6; comp. 1 Pet. v. 5.)
C. 31. 2. Tivog yoqiv yvXoyrfi-y b narijq fjfidv 'A^qadfi; ovyt
di'/aioavvyv xat dX'fjdsLav 8id niarswg noi'rjaag; 'laad/ fisrd ns-
noid-'Tjascog ytvda/wv to fiiXXov, fjdiwg nqoa fjy era &vaia. (James
ii. 21.) G. 38. 2. '0 aocpdg Ev8stxvvadw rfjv aocpiav airov fif sv Xd
yoig dXX' sv s'qyoig dyadolg. (James iii. 13.)
Second Epistle.^

2. Hermas.
Vis. ILL. 9. 5. BXinere rfjv '/qiaiv rfjv ineqyofiivyv. Ol insq-
syovrsg ovV ixtyrelre rovg netvdvrag ewg ovnw b nvqyog srsX-
iady' fisrd ydq rd reXeadyvai rdv niqyov dsXyasrs ayadonoislv
'xat oiy s^srs rdnov. BXinere ovv vjielg ol yavqoifievot iv np
nXovrqi vfidv fi-ynors arsvdtovaiv ol varsqov fisvoi, xal b arev-
' Clement of Eome. This corresponds in idea with the passages marked in
N, T. but as a whole it seems to be from some Apocryphal source unknown in
our day. See Hilg,, Lightf, or Gebh. & Harn. in loc. Compare Hermas Vis. II, 3;
and 2 Clem. 11. 2.
* In Prov. iii. 34 it reads Kupio; uitspiQCpavoi; x.t.X, In James and Peter
(see Clement) it reads o' 0£o; UTCEprjtpavoi; x,t.X. The Hebrew has simply sin
"he" see Lightf in loc.
8 The following may be compared as possible echoes : C. 8, 6 (Jaraes i, 27),
c. 15, 1 (James v, 20).

294 JAMES.
ayfidg aircov dva^yasrai nqdg rdv Kvqiov xat sxxXsiadyasade
fierd rcov dyaddv vfidv s'^co T^g dvqag rov nvqyov.''- (James
V. 1 &c.)
Mand. II. 2. Hqdrov ftiv fiydsvdg xaraXdXsi, fiydi fj8iiog
d'/ovs '/araXaXovvrog' sl 8i ftfj, xat av 6 d'/ovcov svoyog say T^g
dfiaqriag rov '/araXaXovvrng, idv niarsvayg ry xaraXaXia y av
d'/oiajjg' niarevaag ydq '/at av airdg e^etg xaTa toj; ddsXcpov
anv. O'vrwg ovv svoyog .say ryg dfiaqriag rov xaraXaXovvzog.
Hovrjqd fj '/araXaXid, d'/ardararov daifidvtdv iartv, fiydinors sl-
qyvsvov, aXXd ndvrors iv diyoaraaiaig '/aroi'/ovv. Anixov ovv
an airov, '/at sidyviav ndvrors s^sig fisrd ndvrcov. (James i.
8; iii. 8; iv. 11 &c.)
Mand. JX. 1.^ Zdqov dnd asavrov tjjv dixpvxiciv '/at fiydiv
'dXwg 8ixpvx'>jayg airyaaadai naqd roij Qsov, Xiywv sv asavrcp on
nwg 8vvafiaL airyaaadai n naqd rov Kvqiov '/at XaXslv, fjfiaqr-
yxdg roaavra sig airdv; ftq diaXoyitov ravra, aXX i^ bXyg rfjg
'/aq8iag aov sniarqsxpov snt rdv Kvqtov, '/at alrov naq' airov
ddiardxrwg, xat yvday rfjv noXvayXaxviav airov, on oi fiy as
iy/araXiny, dXXd rd a'irqfia rfjg xpvxyg aov nXyqoipoqyaei. (James
i. 4&C.; iv. 6&c.; v. 11.)
Mand. XI. 5. Hdv ydq nvevfia dnd Qeov dodiv oi'/ ineq-
cozdrat, dXXd syov t^v 8vvafiiv rfjg dsdryrog dcp' kavrov XaXst
ndvra, 'on dvcodiv iartv dnd rfjg dvvdfiswg rov d-eiov nvevfiarog.
Td di nvevfia to ineqwrwfievov xat XaXovv '/ard rag snidvfiiag
rdv dvdqdnwv iniystdv san xat iXacpqdv, dvvafiiv fiy syov '/at
oXcog oi XaXel idv fiy sneqwrydjj. (James i. 17; iii. 15.^; and
see also 2 Tim. iv. 3.)
Mand. XI. 9. "OTav ovv s'Xdy b dvdqwnog b s'ywv to nvevfia
rd delov elg awaywyfjv dvdqiov 8i'/aicov rdv iydvrwv niariv Qs'iov
nvsifiarog, '/at svrsv^ig yivrjzat nqdg rdv Qsdv ryg avvaywyfjg
riov dvdqiijv i'/sivwv, rdre 6 dyyeXog rov nqocprjzt'/ov nvevfiarog
b '/eifisvng nqdg airdv nXyqol rdv dvdqwnov , '/at nXyqwdstg b
• Hermas. The whole of Vis. III. 9 reminds of St James, and of the N, T.
generally. a Comp, also for St+ux'" ^'5- ^ ^- *• Mand, IX. 11. Mand. XI. Sim, IV. 6.
See for itoXuaTiXaxvia Sim. V. 4. 4, Vis. I, 3. 2.
3 Comp, Mand, IX. 11, i) TtioTi; avuS^v ia-zi itapa Tovi KupCou, xal ?x^' Su-
vajjiiv (jiEyaXifjv if) Sl 6npux'' ^i^iyEiov TCVEufjia ^otiv ixapd toO SiapoXou, Suva|jiiv
(jiiQ S-/j:i\)<;a. See note 2 for farther references.

HEEMAS. IGNATIUS. POLTCARP. IRENAEUS. 295
avdqconog np nvsvfiart np dyicij XaXsl sig rd nXydog xadwg 6
Kvqtog §oiXsrai.
Mand. XII. 1. 1. Aqov dnd asavrov ndaav inidvfiiav novrj-
qdv, s'vdvaat 8i rfjv inidvfiiav rfjv dyadfjv xat asfivrjv iv8s8v fii
vog ydq rfjv inidvfiiav ravrqv fiiafjastg rfjv novyqdv inidvfiiav
'/at yaXivaycoyyastg avrfjv '/addg ^ovXst. 'Ayqia ydq ianv y int-
dvfiia fj novyqd xat 8va'/dXwg yfisqovrat' cpo^sqd ydq iart '/at
Xiav ry dyqidrqn airyg danavq rovg dvdqdnovg' See also Vis.
I. 1. 8.' (James i. 15; i. 26; iv. 4.)
Mand. XII. 5. 2. Avvarai 6 8td^oXog dvzinaXalaai , xaza-
naXalaai 8i oi Svvarai. 'Edv ovv dvnarddfjzs ainp, vt'/qdsig
cpsi^srat dcp' vfidv '/aryayvfifiivog. (James iv. 7. 12.)
Mand. XIL 6. 3.* (James iv. 12.) See before, Ap. Fath.
and Synopt. See also Mand. XII. 2. 4.
3. Ignatius. ^
4. PoLTCARP. ^
5. Striac and Old Latin Versions. Muratorian Canon.
(See p, 292, note 1,)
6. Irenaeus.
B. LV. 16. 2. Et quia non per haec justificabatur homo, sed
in signo data sunt populo, ostendit, quod ipse Abraham sine cir
curacisione et sine observatione sabbatorum, credidit Beo, et re-
putatum est illi ad jusiitiam, et amicus Bei vocatus est. (James
ii. 23. comp. Rom. iii. 23, 24; iv. 3; Gal. iii. 6.)
B. IV. 13. 4. (Abraham) amicus factus est Dei. (James ii. 23.)
B. V. 1. 1. Neque rursus nos ah ter discere poteraraus, nisi
magistrum nostrum videntes et per auditum nostrura vocem
ejus percipientes: uti iraitatores quidera operura, factores autem
* Mand. XII is evidently based on James, as also Maud. IX aud XI.
' Ignatius. Compare as echo : Ad Polyc. 4. 3, [Jiin Oii:Epifl'.pivii x.t.X, (James
ii, 2), I Polycarp, Compare as echo : C. 5. 3 with James iii, 2.

296 JAMES.
sermonum ejus facti, communionem habeamus cum ipso;
Facti autera initium facturae.^ (James i. 18, 22.)

7. Clement of Alexandria. ^
Eus. H. E. VI. 14 (See before. Catholic Epistles, p. 289
and note.)
Strom. III. 6. p. 533. Aiyst de airolg fj yqacpfj' "vneq
ycpdvotg b Qedg dvrirdaaerat, raneivolg de 8i8wat ydqtv." ^ (Jaraes
iv. 6; 1 Pet. v. 5; Prov. iii. 34.)
Ibid. IV. 26. p. 639. Tovro ydq "rd dvd-og rov yoQ^ov,"
'/at rd "'/ard adqxa nsqtnarslv," xat "aaqxr/ovg eivat" '/ard
rdv dndaroXov, ev dfiaqriaig 'ovrag. (James i. 10; 1 Pet. i. 24;
2 Cor. X. 2.)
Ibid. VL. 18. p. 825. "'Edv fifj nXeovday vfidv fj 8t'/aioavvq
nXelov riov Iqajifiariwv xat Waqiaatwv" nov xard dnoxyv xaxwv
8 1'/aiov fiivwv, aiv rip fisrd T^g ev rovroig rsXsidaswg '/at np
"rdv nXyaiov dyandv," xai sisqysrslv divaadat, oi'/ easade "/?a-
aiXi'/oi." (Mat. v. 20; James ii. 8.)
8. HiPPOLTTUS.
JTe^i T^g awreXeiag rov xdofiov. (Lagarde, p. 122.) 'H ydq
xqlaig dviXewg san rip fifj noffjaavrt I'Xsog. (James ii. 13.)
9. Tertullian. 1
Be orat. c. 8. Ceterum absit, ut Dominus tentare videatur,
quasi aut ignoret fidem cujusque, aut dejicere sit gestiens.
(Jaraes i. 13.)
Adv. Judaeos c. 2. Unde Abrahara amicus Dei deputatus, si
non de aequitate et justitia legis naturalis? (James ii. 23.)
Scorpiac. c. 12. Quis nunc medullam scripturarura magis
' Irenaeus, "Made the first fruits of Creation." (Anti-Nic, Library,)
' Clement. Corapare as echoes : Paed. Ill, 2, p, 259 and elsewhere <piXo;
Oeou Jaraes ii, 23 (but?); Strora, V, 14. p. 707 (also VIL 8. p. 862; and VII.
11. p. 872) " ?aT(i), 0|jiMV TO val val xal to ou ou." (See James v. 12).
* See before, page 293 (1 Clem, 30, 1 and note). The same words are si
milarly quoted also Strom. IV. 17, p. 611.
1 Tertullian, The following passages are not to shew that Tertullian knew

tertullian. OEIGEN. 297
nosset, quam ipsa Christi schola. . . . Cui potius figuram vocis
suae declarasset, quam cui effigiem gloriae suae revelavit, Petro,
Joanni, Jacobo, et postea Paulo?
10. Origen.^
Comment, in Joann. t. 19. Tom. IV. p. 306. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 569.) 'Edv ydq Xiyyrat fiiv niang, ywqtg 8s s'qywv rvyydvy,
vs'/qd ianv fj roiairrj, wg sv rjj cpsqo fisv y^ laxw^ov sntaroXr
dviyvwfiev. Comment, in Ep. ad Bom. IV. Tom. IV. p. 535. (Migne,
Vol. IV. p. 989.) Nec solus haec Paulus in suis literis scribit:
audi et Jacobum fratrem Domini sirailia protestantera, cura dicit:
"Qui voluerit araicus esse saeculi hujus, inimicus Dei constitue-
tur." (James iv. 4.)
Ibid. p. 536. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 990.) Denique et Jacobus
apostolus ita dicit: "Eesistite diabolo, et fugiet a vobis: appro
pinquate Deo, et appropinquabit vobis." (Jaraes iv. 7, 8.)
Ibid. IX. p. 654. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 1226.) Sicut et Jacobus
apostolus dicit: "Omne datum bonum, et orane donum perfectum
desursum est descendens a Patre luminum." (James i. 17.)
Comment, in Joann. t. 20. Tom. IV. p. 318. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 591.) Ov avyywqqdiv 'dv vnd rdv naqadeyo fiivwv rd' Hiarig
yoiqtg sqywv vsxqd sartv.
Selecta in Psalm. Ps. xxx. 6. Tom. II. p. 644. (Migne,
Vol. II. p. 1300.) 'Iig naqd 'la'/w^oj, wansq 8s rd adfia yioqtg
nvevfiarog vsxqdv ian.
Ibid. hom. IV. in Ps. xxxvi. p. 671. (Migne, Vol. II. p. 1351.)
Justus autem si in aliquo offenderit, si in verbo (Apostolus enim
James: but that they (the nearest approaches) are not quotations. There are
some other passages as De Exhort, Castitatis c, VII (Eom, ii, 13) which are still
more remote,
' Origen is the first to quote or refer to James's Epistle by narae. There
are quotations iu his own Greek which are perfectly explicit. The Latin of his
works is regarded by some with suspicion. The translator had a way of inserting
expletives and titles. The Greek is explicit as regards the Epistle of James : it is
only in the Latin that we find James called the Lord's brother,
2 Mill's note is: "Immo vero ut in ipsius Origenis operibus, a Bufmo Latinis
factis, allegetur haec epistola tanquam Jacobi Apostoli fratris Domini et Scriptura
divina, in commentariis tamen in Joannem Qraeds, ab omni interpolatione liberis,
dubiae apud quosdam auctoritatis eitatur." Mill's G, T Proleg. p, xxiv.

298 JAMES.
est qui dicit: "In raultis enira offendiraus omnes, et si quis in
verbo non offendit, hic perfectus est vir.") (James iii. 2).
Select, in Exod. Tom. IL p. 124. (Migne, Vol. IL p. 288.) Atd
xat iXiydy, 'ort 6 ©eog a?ret^affTOg effTt xaxc<5v.
11. Eusebius.
H. E. I. 12. Kat TWV s^dofifj'/ovra 8i nXsiovg rov 2wryqog
nscpyvivat fiadrjzdg svqoig 'dv iniryqyaag, fidqrvqi yqdfisvog rep
HavXii), fisrd tjjv ex vs'/qwv syeqaiv wcpdat airdv cp-rjaavn nqcorov
fiiv Kycpd, s'nsira rolg dwds'/a, '/at fisrd rovrovg, indvw nsvra-
'/oaioig ddsXcpolg icpdna^. ^Siv nvdg fiiv scpaa/s '/s'/oifiyadai,
rovg nXeiovg 8' 'sn rip §ic^, '/ad-' ov '/aiqdv ainp raira avvs-
rdrrsTo nsqiivai (^or neqifiiveiv). "Eneira 8' cocpdai airdv 'la-
'/co^Cji cpyaiv sig di xat ovrog riov cpsqo fiivwv rov 2wryqog
ddsXcpdv yv.' Eld dg naqd roirovg, '/azd fiifiyaiv rcov 8w8s'/a,
nXeiarwv 'dacov vnaq^dvrwv anoardXcov, oiog xat airdg 6 HavXog
yv, nqoaridyat Xiywv' "Enstra wcpdy rolg dnoardXotg ndat."
Ibid. ll. 1. Tors drjza '/at 'Idxw^ov, rdv rov Kvqiov Xsyd
fisvov ddsXcpdv {on dy '/at ovrog rov Iwafjcp wvdfiaaro nalg' rov
di Xqtarov narfjq 6 'iwafjq), oi fivyarsvdslaa fj naqdivog, nqtv
'y awsXdslv airovg, rpqyro iv yaarqt syovaa ex nvsifiarog dyiov,
dg fj Isqd rdv siayysXiwv 8t8da'/st yqacpfj'), rovrov 8fj rdv 'id-
xw^ov, ov xat di'/aiov inixXyv ol ndXai 8i aqeryg ixdXovv nqo-
reqfjfiara, nqdrov laroqovat ryg iv 'leqoaoXvfioig i'/xXyaiag rdv
rfjg intO'/onyg iyyEiqiadfjvai -dqdvov.
Ibid. II. 23. Totavra '/at rd '/ard '/axw/Jov, ov fj nqwry rcov
ovofiatofiivwv '/adoXtxdrv intaroXcov stvat Xiysrat. lariov di t&g
vodsvsrai fiiv oi noXXot yovv tcDv naXaidv avrfjg ifivyfidvsvaav,
cog oidi rfjg Xsyofisvqg 'lov8a, fiidg xat avryg o'vaqg tcDv eTTTa
Xsyofiivwv xadoXr/cov. 'Oficog 8 I'ofisv '/at rairag fisrd twv Xot
ndv iv nXsiaraig 8Edqfioaisvfisvag i'/'/Xyaiaig.
Ibid. III. 3. (See before, p. 207.)
Ibid. III. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
Bemonstr. Ev. III. 5. 'Ent rovroig '/axw/Sog 6 d8eXcpng rov
Kvqiov, ov ol ndXai rd 'leqoadXvfia ol'/ovvreg i'/dXovv di'/aiov
did rd rfjg dqsrqg nXeove'/rfjfiara, iqcorrjdetg nqng rdv aqyieqiiov
'/at didaa'/dXwv rdv 'Inv8aiwv s'dvovg, riva nsqt rov Xqtarov

EUSEBIUS. ATHANASIUS. CTRYL OF JERUSALEM. EPIPHANIUS. 299
e^ot 8d^av, xansira djco'/qtvdfisvog , 'on vldg Qsnv s'iy, Xidoig
xat avrdg nqdg airdv ^dXXsrat.
Be Eccles. Theol. IU. (Migne, Vol. VI. p. 976.) Kadd Xs-
Xs'/rai EV sriqnig, 'E^OfioXoyslads dXXrjXoig rdg dfiaqriag. (Jaraes
V. 16.)
12. Athanasius.
Opp. Tom. IL p. 38. (See before, p. 13.)
Synops. Athanas. (See before, p. 16 &c.)
Ad Serap. Ep. 1. Tora. I. p. 539. (Migne, Vol. II. p. 592.)
Oix san di naqd rq) Qsip, dg sinsv b 'id'/w^og, naqaXXayfj ''rj
rqonfjg dnoa'/iaafia. (James i. 17.)
C. Arian. Or. 3. Tom. I. p. 483. (Migne, Vol. IL p. 452.)
Kadwg xat 6 'ldr/co§og 6 dndaroXog 8i8da'/wv sXsys' §ovXydstg
dns'/vyaev fjfidg Adycjj dXydsiag. (James i. 18.)
13. Cyril of Jerusalem.
Catech. IV. (See before, p. 19.)
14. Epiphanius.
Haeres. Tom. I. (See before, p. 21.)
Ibid. I. t. 1. h. 31. p. 206. Kal ndXtv b dyiog 'idxw^og Xi
ywv nsqt rfjg roiairyg 8L8aa'/aXiag' ort "Ov/ sartv dvwdsv y
airfj aocpia '/areqyofiivy , dXX' iniysiog, xpvyt'/fj, 8atfiovtw8qg.
'H de dvcodsv aocpia nqdrov ftiv dyvfj ianv, enstra elqyvi'/fj, ev-
nsid-fjg, d8td'/qiTog, fisarfj iXiovg, '/at '/aqndv dyaddv," xat rd
E^yg. (James iii. 17.)
Ibid. LLL. t. 2. h. 77. p. 1021. jKaTa to ysyqafiftivov ' 'on
"Qqya/sia de xadaqd rip Qeip xai Harqt a'vry iartv, inta'/snr-
sadat oqipavovg, '/at xyQ^S £»' '^S dXixpst avrdv, 'dantXov savrdv
ryqslv dnd rov '/dofiov." (James i. 27.)
15. Jerome.
Be Vir. LU. c. 2. Jacobus qui appellatur frater Domini,
cognomento Justus, ut nonnuUi existimant, Joseph ex aUa

300

JAMES.

uxore, ut autem mihi videtur, Mariae sororis matris Domini,
cujus Joannes in libro suo meminit, filius; post passionem Do
mini statim ab Apostolis lerosolyraorura episcopus ordinatus,
unam tantum scripsit Epistolam, quae de septem Catholicis est;
quae et 'ipsa ab alio quodam sub nomine ejus edita asseritur:
licet paulatim tempore procedente obtinuerit auctoritatem.
Ep. II. ad Paulin. (See before, p. 21.)

301

XXIX.
FIRST P E T E R.^
[COMPARE SECTIONS I-UL XL XXVII.)
1 This Epistle of Peter (which Jerome is singular in supposing to have
been written in Hebrew) has sufficient testimony in its favour to show its ac
ceptance in the early church. The words of 2 Peter iii. 1 may be considered the
earliest of all. The silence of the Muratorian fragment does not outweigh the
positive testimony in its favour of the Old Latin and of Irenaeus aud Tertullian,
And the Eastern Church gives its witness in the Syrian Canon, Critical opinion
is found in Origen's words. Modern objections- are therefore mainly founded on
internal grounds. Semler led the way in doubting that Peter wrote it ; and dis
puted c, V, 13, 14. Cludius (a.d. 1808) ascribed it to a disciple of Paul's, Eich
horn and De W^ette followed in this view. Schwegler made an elaborate indict
ment against it as an apology for Paulinism addressed to the Petrine party, and
intended to serve as a ground of mediation or compromise between the Petrine
and Pauline sections of the divided church. He ascribed its date to the time of
the persecution by Trajan. There is an able .irticle by M^eiss (Stud, u, Krit,
1865, p. 619) in reply to all who give it a later date than A.D. 54. Weiss seeks
to prove that 1 Peter was written at an earlier period than Paul's circular letter
(Ephesians). See also a full discussion in small compass by Briickner in De
Wette's Kurzgef Handb. d. N. T. (1865) p. 19. Hilgenfeld (Einl, p, 627) has a
statement of characteristic force and clearness in which he refuses to accept the
Epistle as merely a mediation between Petrine and Pauline Christians, but con
cludes (with the Tubingen School generally) that it was written from Rome
during Trajan's persecution, and also that its author was a raan who used Paul's
Epistles, and James, and Hebrews. The principle on which all those modern
objections go is, that the admitted similarity of this Epistle to some of Paul's
and to James marks it out as a forgery. But the coincidences of thought only
demonstrate the harmony of doctrine pervading the N. T, No imitator of Paul
would have written an Epistle which passed by without explicit mention the doc
trine of Justification by Faith; nor would a follower of James have dwelt so
ranch on doctrine. That the Epistle blends doctrine and practice as no other
does, with a sympathy founded on experience of the lights and shadows of a
believer's life, is beyond dispute, and has been its attraction to penitent believers
iu all ages; but it is too deep and original aud unique to be the work of any
imitator or subordinate. Again: the ethical passages (such as c, iii. 8, comp. Eom.
xii. 10; c, ii, 13, comp, Rom. xiii. 1), on wbich some found for proof of imitation,
may really be traced to the words of the Master Himself. The student may com
pare c, i, 5 with Gal. iii. 23; c, ii, 6, 7 with Rom. ix. 23 ; c. ii. 11 with James iv. 1 ;
c. ii. 13 with Rora, xiii, 1 ; c, iii. 9 with Rom, xii. 1 7 ; i;. iii, 18 with Eom. vi, 9, 10 ;
c. iii, 21 with Eom. vi. 4 ; c, iv, 1 with 2 Cor, v, 15 and Eom, vi, 7 ; c, iv, 10. 11
with Eom, xii. 6, 7; c. 5. 1 with Eom. viii. 18. As regards Hebrews, 1 Pet. i. 2
repeats Heb. xii, 24; but the other passages do not sulfice to establish a con
nection. As regards James, 1 Pet. i. 1 may be compared (and partly contrasted)
with James i. 1 ; c, i, 6, 7 with James i, 2-4; c, i. 23-25 with James 1, 18 ; c, iv, 8
with James v, 20, There are sorae coincidences of expression which seem to
imply more than harmony of thought, and require us to suppose either that
they were common phrases in Apostolic circles, or that one of the Apostles had
seen the other's works. If the latter supposition he adopted, it is not easy to
say which had the priority.

302 fiest petee.
1. Barnabas. 1
2. Clement of Rome.^
First Epistle.
C. 30. 2. (See before, under James.)
C. 38. 1. 2wtiadw ovv fjfiiov 'dXov rd adfia iv Xqianp 'Iq
aov , '/at vnoraaaiadw 'sxaarog rip nXyaiov airoi, '/addg '/at
iridy iv np x^Qio^icii^t airov. (1 Pet. v. 5; iv. 10; ii. 8.)
C. 49. 5. 'Aydny '/aXinrst nXydog dfiaqridv. (1 Pet. iv. 8 ;
comp. James v. 20.)
C. 57. 1. 'Yfielg ovv, ol rfjv '/ara^oXfjv T^g ardaewg nonfj-
aavreg, vnordyqre rolg nqsa^vr iqotg, -/at natdsvdrjzs elg fiera
votav, '/dfixpavrsg rd ydvara rrjg '/.aqdiag vficov. Mddsrs vno-
rdaasadai dnod-ifievot '/.r.X. (1 Pet. v. 5; ii. 1.)
C. 59. 2. (Corap. c. 36. 2.) 'E/rsvfj rfjv Siyaiv -/at Ixsaiav
noiovfisvot 'onwg rdv dqidfidv rdv '/aryqidfiyfiivov rdv exAexTtSv
avrov sv oXcj) rip 'xdaftcji dtacpvXd^y ddqavarov b dyjiiovqydg rdv
dndvrwv did rov -yyanyfiivov naiddg airov 'lyaov Xqiarov, 8i'
ov ixdXsasv fjfidg dnd a'/drovg sig cpdg, dnd dyvwaiag
sig iniyvwaiv dd^yg dvdfiarog avrov. (1 Pet. ii. 9. See also
Eph, i. 6.)
C. 61. 1. Totg Te dqyovat '/at fjynvfiivoig fjfidv snt T^g yyg,
ai, dianora, E'8ioxag tijv i^ovaiav T^g ^aaiXs'tag airolg did rov
fisyaXonqsnovg '/at dvs'/diyyqrov xqdrovg anv, sig to yivojffxovTag
fjfidg rfjv vnd aoi airolg dsdofiivyv do|av xai rifiyv vnorda-
asadai airolg, jtrjdiv ivavnovfiivovg np dsXrjftari aov. (1 Pet.
ii. 13, 14; comp. Rom. xiii. 1; 1 Tim. ii. 1 &c.)
' Barnabas. There is no passage in Barnabas which can be fairly claimed as
quoting 1 Peter. But there are several passages which might be regarded as
echoes if there were other proof that the writer had 1 Peter before him. Thus
c. 5. 1 (al.aa toC pavTia|jiaTo;), comp. 1 Pet. i. 2; c. 16. 8, comp. 1 Pet. i. 3, 23;
c. 16. 10 (itvEufiaTixo; vao;), 1 Pet. ii, 5; c. 19. 11 (ou8e Sidou; yoyyuoEi;), IPet.
iv, 9. ' Cleraent. See Introduction, The passages in 1 Clem, quoting or suggest
ing 1 Peter may be given thus: C, 1. 1 (^e'vit];), 1 Pet, iv. 12; o, 2. 2 _(ayaSo-
TCOitav), 1 Pet. iv. 19 ; c, 2, 4 (a'SsXcpoTif);), 1 Pet. ii. 17 ; t, 7. 4 (tC^iov), 1 Pet,
i. 19; c. 16. 1 (Tioffiviov), 1 Pet. v. 2, 3 [also Luke xii. 32, Acts xx, 28]; c, 16.
17 (OtoyP"M-(J''OS)i 1 Pet, ii, 21 [2 Mace. ii. 28]; c. 30. 1 (xaraXaXid;), 1 Pet, ii, 1;
c, 36. 2 (to iau(j,aaTov auToO cpco;), 1 Pet. ii. 9; «. 38. 1 (see text); c. 40. 1
and 53. 1 (^yxExOipoTE;), 1 Pet i, 12; c, 49, 1 (see text); c. 57. 1 (see text);
C 59. 2 (see text); c, 61. 1 (see text).

clement of ROME. HERMAS. 303
Second Epistle.
C. 16. 4. Kqsiaawv vyarsla nqoasvyyg, iXsyfioaivq di dficpnz-
sqcov dydny de xaXvnrst nXfjdng dfiaqridv. (1 Pet. iv. 8.)
3. Hermas.
Vis. IIL 11. 3. "Qansq ydq nl nqeapvreqoi, fiy/in s'xovzsg
iXnt8a rov avavsioaai, ov8iv dXXn nqnadnxdaiv sl fif rqv '/oi-
fiyaiv avrdv, nvrco xat vfislg fiaXa'/iadivreg dnd nov (iuovi'/dv
nqayfifirwv naqedd'/are savrovg sig rdg d'/ydiag, '/at oi'/ ins^-
qixpars savrcov rdg fisqifivag int rdv Kiqtnv ' dXXd idqavady vficov
fj didvnia, xal snaXaicodqrs ralg Xvnaig vfidv. (1 Pet. v. 7.)
Vis. IV. 2. 4. KaXdg i^icpvysg, cpqatv, 'on tijv fiiqifivav aov
int rdv Qsdv ini^^ixpag. (1 Pet. v. 7.)
Vis. IV. 3. 4. Td di yqvaovv fiiqog vfielg iari ol s'/cpvydvzsg
rdv '/dofiov rnvrov. "Qansq ydq rd yqvaiov do'/ifidtsrat did rod
nvqdg '/at svyqyarov yivsrat, o'vrwg xai vftelg dn/tfidtsads nl
'/aroL'/oivrsg iv airip. Ol ovv fisivavzsg '/at nvqwdivzeg vn'
airov, '/adaqiadyasads. "iianeq rd yqvaiov dno^dXXei T'qv a-/coqiav
avrov, ovrw '/at vfisig dno^aXelre ndaav Xinyv xai arsvo'ywqiav
xat xadaqiadfjasa&s xat yqyaifiot sasade elg T'qv ol~/o8ofifjv rov
nvqyov. (1 Pet. i. 7.)
Mand. II. 1. Aiyet fioi' 'AnXdrrjza sys '/at a'xaxog yivov
xat say c5g Ta vynta rd fifj yivwa'/ovra tjjv novyqiav rfjv dnoX-
Xiovaav rfjv ^w^v Tf5v dvdqdnwv. (1 Pet. ii. 2.)
Sim. IX. 16. 5.^ "On, cpyatv, ovrot ol dndaroXot '/at ol 8i-
8da'/aXoL ol 'xyqv^avrsg rd 'dvofia rov vlov rov Qsov, xoifiydivzsg
EV dvvdfiSL xat niarsi rov vlov roi Qsov s'/fjqv^av '/at rolg nqo-
'/sxoifiyfiivoig, '/at airot s'dw/av avroig tjjv acpqayl8a rov '/q-
qvy ftarog. Kari^yaav ovv fier' airdv elg rd vdcoq, '/at ndXiv
dvi^yaav. (1 Pet. iii. 19, 21.)
Sim. IX. 21. 3 (comp. Sim. IX. 14. 6). Ol dixpvyoi, orav
• Hermas. This is quoted not as having any definite reference to 1 Pet. iii.
19 &c,, but because it has beeu cited in connection with the controversies on tho
genuineness of the Epistle, It is strange that Dr Davidson, Int, to N, T. I. 427
should say that "the idea found in the 'shepherd' of Hermas" is that "he who
preached to the dead was the Apostle Peter. " Hermas may be quoting Peter.
The connection with baptism, here as iu 1 Peter iii. 19, 21, is not without signi
ficance. I cannot say with Gebhardt and Harnack " 1 Pet. iii, 19 ; iv, 6 respici
non potest. "

304 FIRST PETEE.
dXlxpiv dxovawat, did tjjv SsiXiav airdv el8wXoXaTqovai xat rd
ova fia inaiayuvovrat rov Kvqiov avrdv. (1 Pet. iv. 16;
Mark viii. 38.)
Sim. IX. 28. 5. BXinere ovv vjisig at ravra ^ovXevdfievoi,
ftynors fj §ovXy avry diafieivrj sv ralg 'xaqdiatg vjiwv, '/at dno-
¦davslads Tip Qsip. 'Yfislg de ol ndaxovrsg svs'/sv rov dvdfiarog
do^dtstv ocpsiXsrs rdv jQsdv, on ddiovg vfidg fjyqaaro b Qedg
'iva TOVTO rd ovofia ^aardtyrs, xat ndaat vfiiov al dfiaqriat la-
dioaiv. (1 Pet. iv. 13, 16.)
Sim. IX. 28. 6. Ov/ovv fia'/aqiters savrovg' dXXd do'/slrs
s'qyov fiiya nsnoiy/ivai, idv rig vficov did rdv Qedv nddy, tcofjv
Vfiiv b Kvqiog ^ja^t'^eTai, '/at oi voelre' al ydq dfiaqriai vficov
'/are^dqyaav, '/at el fifj nendvd-are e'vexev rov dvdfiarog Kvqiov,
did rdg dfiaqriag vfidv redvfj/etre dv rip Qscp. (1 Pet. iv. 14;
comp. Mat. v. 11.)
Sim. IX. 29. 1. ... niarsvaavrsg roiovroi slatv, tSg vfjnia
^qicpy elaiv. (1 Pet. ii. 2.)
4. Ignatius. ^
5. Polycarp. 1
Philipp. c. 1. 3. JBig ov oi'x ido'vTeg niarsvere yaqa
dve'/XaX-yrcj) xai 8s8n^aa fisvy eig ^v noXXot snidvfioiaiv
slaeXdelv. (1 Pet. i. 8, 12.)
Ibid. c. 2. 1. Jtd dvatwadfievQi rdg oacpvag vfidv 8ov-
Xevaars rip Qsip iv cpd^cp xat dXyd-sicc, dnoXtndvrsg rfjv '/svfjv
fiaraioXoyiav xat rfjv rdv noXXcov nXdvyv, ntarsvaavreg elg
TOV iysiqavra rdv Kvqiov fjficov 'lyaovv Xqtardv ex ve-
xqcov, '/at dovra avrcp 8d^av, '/at -dqdvov ix ds^idv avrov.
(1 Pet. i. 13, 21.)
Ibid. c. 2. 2. °0g sqysrat '/qiryg tdvrwv xat vs/qdv. (1 Pet.
iv. 5. Comp. Acts x. 42, and xvii. 31.)
Ibid. Mfj dnodiddvrsg '/a'/dv dvrt '/a'/ov, 'y XoiSoqiav dvrt
Xoi8oqiag. (1 Pet. iii. 9.)
• Ignatius. In Ignatius may be compared as echoes: Magn. 13, 2 (uicoTay-
iqte), 1 Pet, V. 5 ; ad Polyc. 4. 3 (SovXEViETtoaav x.t.X.), 1 Pet. ii. 6,
• Polycarp. Compare as echoes Polycarp's Salutation with 1 Pet, i. 17;
C. 8. 2 with 1 Pet. iv. 14, 16.

POLYCAEP. PAPIAS. 305
Ibid. c. 5. 3. KaXdv ydq rd dva'/dnrsadat dnd rcov inid-v-
fiidv EV npxoaficfi, on ndaa intd-vfiia xard rov nvsi ftarog
arqareverai. (IPet. ii. 11. Corapare Gal. v. 17.)
Ibid. c. 7. 2. N-fjCpovreg nqdg rdg eiydg. (1 Pet. iv. 7.)
Lbid. c. 8. 1. 'AdtaXeinrwg ovv nqoa'/aqreqdfiev rfj EXni8t fjfidv
'/at rip a^qa^covt T^g 8t'/atoavvyg fjfidv, 'dg san Xqiardg 'lyaovg,
og dvfjvsy/sv fjficov rdg dfiaqriag rip Idicji adfiart int
rd ^vXov, og dfiaqriav oi'/ in oiyasv, aids svqidy 8d-
Xog sv rip ardfiart avrov' dXXd 8t' fjfidg, 'iva CjjffWjttev
ev aircp, ndvza vnifietvev. Mifiyrat ovv yevdfieda T^g vno
fiovyg airov' '/at sdv ndaywfisv 8id rd 'dvo fia airov, do^dtwfiev
airdv. Toirov ydq fjfilv rdv vnoyqajifidv sdy/s 8t' savrov,
'/at fjfielg rovro eniarevaafiev. (1 Pet. ii. 24, 22; 1 John iv. 9;
also IPet. ii. 20, 21; iv. 14, 16.)^
Lbid. c. 10. 1. In his ergo state et Domini exemplar sequimini,
firmi in fide et irarautabiles, fraternitatis araatores, diligentes in
vicem, in veritate sociati, mansuetudinera Domini alterutri prae-
stolantes, nullum despicientes. (1 Pet. ii. 17.)
Ibid. c. 10. 2. Omnes vobis invicem subjecti estote, conversa-
tionem vestram irreprehensibilem habentes in gentibus, ut ex bonis
operibus vestris et vos laudem accipiatis, et Dorainus in vobis
non blaspheraetur. (1 Pet. ii. 12.)
Eus. H. E. IV. 14.^ '0 yi rot HoXi'/aqnog iv rrj SqXwdeiay
nqdg OtXinnyalovg, airoi yqacpfj cpeqofisvy sig devqo '/ixqqrat
nai fiaqrvqiaig and T^g Hirqov nqoriqag sniaroXfjg.
6. Papias.
Eus. H. E. III. 39. Kixqyrat 8' airdg fiaqrvqiaig b dnd T^g
'Iwdvvov nqoriqag sntaroXfg, '/at dnd rfjg Hirqov bfioiwg.
* Though this passage is almost entirely frora 1 Peter, the order of the
clauses is not as in Peter; and the use of ij7rE'(Ji£ivEV and uTtOfiovi^; is not a quo
tation, although evidently suggested by 1 Pet. ii, 20, To "suffer on account of
Christ's name" is evidently a reminiscence of 1 Pet, iv. 14, 16 (less probably of
Acts V, 41), but not a quotation of the words, 'Y7T0Ypa|Ji(ji6; is from 1 Pet, ii. 21,
though not similarly placed in tbe context. The treatment of his authority by
Polycarp here is valuable when we consider what may be regarded as a similar
use of Mat. v, 3, &c, (See passage under Apostol. Fathers and the Synoptists,)
8 There can be no doubt that Polycarp knew, quoted, and imitated 1 Peter.
This quotation from Eusebius shows that this fact drew attention at an early date.
20

306 first peter.
7. Letter to Diognetus.
C 9. 2. l^EXedJv avrdg rag fjfieriqag dfiaqriag dvsdi^aro.']'-
(1 Pet. ii. 24. Corapare Isaiah liii.) Airdg rdv 'idiov vldv dnidoro
Xvrqov vniq fjfiwv, rdv dyiov vniq avdfiwv, rdv dxa'/ov vniq rdiv
'/a'/iov, rdv di'/aiov vniq rdv ddi'xwv. (1 Pet. iii. 18.)
8. Letter of the Church of Vienne and Lyons.
Eus. H. E.N. 1. Ol ydq '/ard rfjv nqdryv avXXyxpiv s^aqvot
ysvofisvot aws'/Xsiovro '/at airoi '/at fierelyov rdv deivwv {oi8i
ydq sv rip xatqcp rovrtj} 'dcpsXdg rt airolg fj i^dqvqaig iyivsro')
aXX 01 ftiv ofioXoyovvrsg o '/at yaav, avvsxXsiovro dg Xqtanavoi,
fiydsfiidg cxXXyg alriag airolg ijzicpsqofiivyg ' ovrot di Xotndv dg
avdqocpdvot xat fitaqot '/arsiyovzo, dinXdrsqov naqd rnvg Xninnvg
'/oXato fisvoi. E'/sivovg fiiv ydq insxovcpttsv fj yaqd rfjg fiaqrvq
iag, xat fj iXntg rcov inyyysXjiiviov , '/at fj nqdg rdv Xqtardv
aydny, '/at rd Hvsijia rd Harqi'/dv, rovrovg 8i rd awsiddg fis-
ydXwg irifiwqsiro, wars '/at naqd rolg Xoinolg dnaat xard rdg
naqddovg 6ta8'fjXovg rag 'dxpsig aircov sivat. Ol fisv ydq iXaqol
nqorjsaav, dd^yg '/at ydqtrog noXXfjg ralg oxpsaiv avrcov avyxe-
xqafiivyg, wars xat rd 8safid '/da fiov sinqsnfj neqtxeladat ai
rolg, dg vificpy xsxoafiyfisvrj iv xqoaawroig yqvaolg nsnoixiXfii-
voig, rfjv siwdiav (2 Cor. ii. 15) ddwddreg dfia rfjv Xqiarov, ware
iviovg dd^ai '/at fiiqc^ xoOfii'/ip '/eyqiadai airoig' ol di, xaT-
ycpelg xat raneivot -/at dvaeidelg, xat ndaqg daxyfioavvyg dvd-
nXeot, nqoasrt 8e xat vnd rdiv idvdv ovetditdfievoi dg dyevvelg
xat dvavdqot, dvdqocpdvwv fiiv syxXyfiara syovrsg, dnoXwXs'/orsg
de TJJV ndvrifiov xai sv8o^ov '/at t^oonotdv nqoayyoqiav. (1 Pet.
iv. 13-16.) Ibid. V. 2. 'EransLVOvv eai;Toi)g vnd tjjv '/qaratdv yslqa, vcp'
^g ixavf3g viiv slatv vxpwjiivoi. (1 Pet. v. 6.)
9. The Muratorian Canon.
See p. 7 (not mentioned).
10. Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
See pp. 1, 2 (contained in both),
' Diognetus. Of doubtful genuineness. See Otto's note. (3r4 Ed. 1879.)

IRENAEUS. CLEMENT OP ALEXANDRIA. TERTULLIAN. 307

11. Irenaeus.
B. IV. 9. 2. Et Petrus ait in epistola sua: "Quem non vi
dentes diligitis," inquit, "in quem nunc non videntes credidistis,
gaudebitis gaudio inenarrabih." (IPet. i. 8.)
B. IV. 16. 5. Et propter hoc Petrus ait, "non velaraentura
raalitiae habere nos libertatem," sed ad probationem et mani-
festationera fidei. (1 Pet. ii. 16.)
Eus. H. E. V. 6. (See below, under 1 John.)
12. Clement of Alexandria, i
Strom. IV. 7. p. 584. "'AXX' el '/at ndaxofisv did di'/aio-
aivqv, fiaxdqioi," cpqatv b Hirqog. "Tdv ds cpd(iov avrHv fiy
cpo§ydyre, fiydi raqcrydyrs, Kvqiov de tov A'^iotov dyidaars iv
ralg xaq8iaig vfiiov. 'Eroifioi 8i dst nqdg dnoXoyiav navrt rip
alrovvri vfidg Xdyov neqt T^g ev vfilv iXnidog, aXXd fierd nqa'v-
rrjzog '/at cpdqov, avveidqaiv syovzeg dyadfjv, 'iva iv ip '/azaXa-
Xelade '/araiayvvddatv ol inyqedtovreg rfjv '/aXfjv dvaarqocpfjv
Vfidv iv Xqianp' '/qelrrov ydq dyadonoiovvrag , el diXoi rd di-
Xijfia TOV Qeov ndayetv y '/a'/onoiofjvrag." (IPet. iii. 14-17.)
Paedag. I. 6. p. 124. Atd rovro cpyat '/at 6 Hirqog "dno-
difievot ovv ndaav '/a'/iav '/at ndvra ddXov xat rfjv vndxqiaiv
'/at cpdovov '/at 'xaraXaXidv, ci»g dqnysvvqra ^qicpq, rd Xoyt'/dv
ydXa ininodr'jaars, Hva iv avnp av^ydrjzs sig awrqqiav, sl iysv-
aaads on Xqiardg b Kvqtog. " (1 Pet. ii. 1-3.)
Eus. H. E. VI. 14. (See before: The Cathohc Epistles, p. 289.)
13. Tertullian. 1
De Virg. Veland. c. 17. Haec cura bona pace legentibus, uti-
litatera consuetudini praeponentibus, pax et gratia a Doraino
> See also Strom, III. 9, p, 644 (o" Saufidaio; Ile'Tpo;); and III, 18. p. 562
(o' llETpo; h T-i) ^iriaToXiii) ; and IV. 7, p, 585; and IV, 20, p. 622; and there are
about twenty more passages, some with the name of Peter and some without,
» Tertullian, Credner (Gesch. des N. T. Kan, § 80) admits that Tertullian,
quoted from 1 Peter in Scorp. c. 12, c, 14, and Adv. Jud. c, 10, but throws doubt on
his respect for the Epistle, seeing that he does not quote it in his De Resurrectione.
Volkmar (ibid, § 182) more broadly denies the authenticity of the works of
Tertullian from which the quotations are taken; and concludes that if he ever
20*

308

FIRST PETEE.

nostro Jesu redundet, cura Septimio TertuUiano cujus hoc opus-
culum est. (1 Pet. i. 2.)
Be Oratione c. 20. De raodestia quidera cultus et ornatus
aperta praescriptio est etiara Petri, cohibentis eodem ore, quia
eodem et spiritu, quo Paulus, et vestium gloriara et auri super-
biani et criniura lenonera {al. lenoniam) operositatem. (1 Pet. iii. 3.)
Adv. Praxean. c. 27. Sermo autera Deus, et Sermo Domini manet
in aevum. (IPet. i. 25; comp. Ps. cxix. 89; Is. xl. 8; Johni. 1.)
Adv. Jud. c. 10. Christus, qui dolura de ore suo locutus non
est. (1 Pet. ii. 22; comp. Is. liii. 9.)
Scorpiace, c. 12. Petrus quidem ad Ponticos, " Quanta enim,"
inquit, "gloria, si non ut delinquentes puniaraini sustinetis? Haec
enira gratia est, in hoc et vocati estis etc." (1 Pet. ii. 20, 21.)
Lbid. c. 14. Condixerat scilicet Petrus regem quidem hono-
randum.2 (1 Pet. ii. 13.)
14. Origen.
Eus. H. E. YI. 25. (See before, p. 8.)
Hom. in Genes. (See before, p. 51.)
Hom. in libr. Jesu Nave. (See before, p. 52.)
Comment, in Mat. t. 15. Tom. III. p. 692. (Migne, Vol. III.
p. 1333.) HaqaXa^dv de eig towo and rs rfjg nqdryg 'EntaroXyg,'^
xat T^g HavXov nqdg Koqivdiovg nqoriqag qyrd, nqoaydyay tJg
knew 1 Peter it was at the end of his life, after a,d, 207, and in a Greek form.
Regarding the controversy on the genuineness of Tertullian's Adv. Jud. and
Scorpiace, see Semler's edition of Tertullian, Vol, V, p. 212; Neander's Anti-
gnosticus, p. 530 (Bohn's Transl,); Kaye's Tertullian, Pref. to second edition;
and Ronsch, Das N. T. TertuUians, p. 556. To pronounce all those treatises
(or the parts of them, as Adv. Jud, c, 10 or De Orat, u. 20) spurious is » violent
proceeding, which the facts do not justify. Retaining them, however, we have
evidence that Tertullian knew and used 1 Peter, That on other occasions he
omitted it, where we should have expected quotations, shows that he did not al
ways accept it without reserve. The passage from De Orat, c. 20 is conclusive,
and is too well supported not to be genuine.
* Corapare as possible echoes or allusions: Fug. c, 12, pretiosissimo san
guine, &c. (1 Pet. i. 18, 19); Corona, c. 15, incorruptus, &c. (1 Pet, i. 4); Adv.
Marc, 5, 12, elatos aemulantem (1 Pet, v. 5).
• Origen. Lardner (araending Huet) notes that the reading was TCpoCi for
n^Tpou, not repuTif];, so that there is not implied reference to a second Epistle,
See p, 8 for double reference. Origen often quotes 1 Peter. See Lardner I, p, 539 ;
but Lardner — inasmuch as there is no Greek quotation of "the First Epistle"
as such, — supposes that in the Latin (as in next extract) we owe the form of re-

OEIGEN. CYPRIAN. 309
vyicog slqyfisvwv rcP Xdycjj- Xiyst ydq b ftiv Hirqog' Elg ov dqrt
ftfj oqiovrsg, dyXovdrt' lyaovv Xqiarnv, ntarsvovrsg de dyaX-
Xtdrs, '/at rd s^fjg, ewg toij- Elg a snttdvfiovatv uyysXot
naqaxvtpatt. (IPet. i. 8-10.)
De Princip. L. LL c. 5, 3. Tom. I. p. 88. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 206.)
Non legunt quid scriptum sit de spe illorura qui in diluvio per-
empti sunt, de qua spe Petrus ipse in priraa Epistola^ sua ita
ait: "Quia Christus mortuus quidem est carne, vivificatus autem
spiritu: in quo pergens praedicavit his spiri tibus qui in carcere
tenebantur, qui increduli fuerant aliquando cum exspectarent Dei
patientiam in diebus Noe cum fabricaretur area, in qua pauci,
id est octo animae salvae factae sunt per aquam, quod et vos
simili forraa nunc baptisraa salvos facit." (IPet. iii. 18, &c.)
Selecta in Psalm. Ln Ps. iii. c. 3, 7. Tom. II. p. 553. (Migne,
Vol. II. p. 1128.) Kard rd Xsydfisva iv tjj '/adoXi'/jj 'EniaroXjj
naqa np Hirqcj) ' " iv co xal rolg iv cpvXa'/jj nvsvfiaat noqsvdetg
ixrjqv^ev dnetdfjaaai nore, 'ore dne^ediyero fj rov Qeov fia'/qo-
d-vfiia iv fjfiiqatg Nde '/araaxevatofiivyg xi§wrov, elg 'yv oXiyot,
rovrianv cr/rd xpvyat, dteaddrjaav 8t vSarog. (1 Pet. iii. 19.)
Comment, in Joann. t. 6. 18. Tom. IV. p. 135. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 260.) Kat neqt ryg sv cpvXa'/jj noqsiag fisrd Hvsvfiarog naqd
np Hirqqi iv rjj '/adoXt'/jj 'EntaroXfj' " Qavarwd-stg ydq," cpyat,
"aaq'/t, tf^onoiydslg x.t.^,." (IPet. iii. 18-20.)
15. Cyprian.
De bono patient. Itera Petrus, super quera Ecclesia, Doraini
dignatione fundata est, in Epistola sua ponit et dicit : " Christus
passus est pro nobis, rehnquens nobis exemplura ut sequamini
vestigia ejus, qui peccatum non fecit, nec dolus inventus est in
ore ejus ; qui cura malediceretur, non maledicebat ; cura pateretur,
non comrainabatur. Tradebat autera se judicanti se injuste."
(1 Pet. ii. 21-23.)
Epist. 58 (al. 56). Ad Thibarit. Nec quisquara rairetur, perse
cutionibus nos assiduis fatigari, et pressuris angentibus frequenter
ference to the translator. Lardner however seems to allow too little weight to
the passage preserved by Eusebius, where there can be no doubt of the reference
to two Epistles, one of thera disputed.

310 FIRST PETEE.
urgeri: quando haec futura in novissimis temporibus Dominus ante
praedixerit, et militiam nostram magisterio et hortaraento sui ser
monis instruxerit: Petrus quoque Apostolus ejus docuerit, ideo
persecutiones fieri, ut probemur, et ut dilectioni Dei, justorum
praecedentium exeraplo, nos etiam morte et passionibus copule-
mur: posuit enim in Epistola sua dicens: "Carissimi, nolite mi
rari ardorera accidentem vobis, qui ad tentationem vestram fit,
nec excidatis, tanquam novum vobis contingat, sed quotienscun-
que comraunicatis Christi passionibus, per omnia gaudete, ut et
in revelatione facta claritatis ejus gaudentes exultetis. Si ira-
properatur vobis in nomine Christi, beati estis, qui raajestatis et
virtutis Domini nomen in vobis requiescit. Quod quidera secun
dura illos blasphematur, secundum nos autem honoratur." (1 Pet.
iv. 12-14.) 16. Eusebius.
H. E. III. 4. 7£ai ex rdv Hirqov 8i Xi^swv, iv bndaaig '/at
ovrng inaqyiaig rovg ix nsqirojiyg rdv Xqiarnv evayysXitdfisvng,
rdv rfjg '/aivfjg diadfj/yg naqe8i8nv Xdyov, aacpig dv e'iy, acp jyg
elqfj/afiev bfioXnyovfiivyg airov sniaroXyg, iv fj rolg i^ 'E^qaicov
niaiv iv diaanoqa Hdvrov xat FaXariag Kannado'/iag re '/at
'Aaiag xat Btdvviag yqdcpet.
Ibid. III. 3. (See before, Epistles as a whole, p. 207.)
Ibid. III. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
1 7. Athanasius.
Epist. 1. ad Serap. p. 522. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 544.) Kat Hi
rqog eyqaxpe' Kofiitd fievot rd riXog T^g niarecog, ffw-
ryqiav xpvydv neqt fjg awryqiag i^styryaav '/at s^-
yqsivyaav nqocpyrai ol nsqt T^g eig vfidg ydqirog
n qncpqreiaavreg, iqevvwvreg elg riva'fj nnlnv "/aiqnv edyX-
nvzn rn iv airnlg Hvevfia Xqiarnv, nqofiaqzvqdfievnv rd elg
Xqtardv nad-yfiara, '/at rdg fierd ravra dd^ag. (1 Pet. i. 10, 11.)
Contra Apollinarium L. II. p. 755. (Migne, Vol. II. p. 1144.)
Kat niog, el aaqxi'/fj y xpvyfj '/ad' vfidg, oi avvdvya'/et np aw
fiari, xat avficpdeiqerai ; JTwg de '/at 6 Hirqog, rdg iv d8y xar-

CYEIL OF JEEUSALEM. EPIPHANIUS. JEROME. 311
syofiivag xpvydg, nvsvfiara dvofidaag, sXsysv 'Enoqsvdy rolg
iv cpvXaxjj .^xara'/s'/Xsta fiivnig nvsvfiaat eiayyeXiaa-
adai rfjv dvdaraaiv. (IPet. iii. 19.)
Opp. Tom. LL p. 38. (See before, p. 13.)
Synops. Athanas. (See before, p. 15.)
18. Cyril of Jerusalem.
Catech. 4. (See before, p. 19.)
19. Epiphanius.
Haeres IIL t. 1. h. 76. p. 941. (xMigne, Vol. II. p. 560.) (See
before, "Canon of Epiphanius," p. 21.)
20. Jerome.
Epist. LL. ad Paulinum. (See before, p. 21.)
Proleg. 7. epist. canonic. (See before, Cathohc Epistles, p. 290.)
De Vir. HI. c. 1. Simon Petrus . . . scripsit duas epistolas,
quae Catholicae nominantur: quarura secunda a plerisque ejus
esse negatur, propter styli cura priore dissonantiara.
Epist. 120. ad Hedibiam, Quaest. XI. Quumque (sc. Paulus)
haberet scientiam sanctarura Scripturarum et serraonis diversa-
ruraque linguarura gratiam possideret; unde ipse gloriatur in
Doraino, et dicit: Gratias ago Deo, quod omnium vestrum Un
guis magis loquor, divinorura sensuura raajestatera digno non pot
erat Graeci eloquii explicare sermone. Habebat ergo Titura in
terpretem, sicut et beatus Petrus Marcum, cujus Evangelium,
Petro narrante et illo scribente, corapositura est. Denique et
duae Epistolae quae feruntur Petri stilo inter se et charactere
discrepant, structuraque verborum. Ex quo inteUigimus, pro ne
cessitate rerum, diversis eum usura interpretibus.

312

XXX.
SECOND PETER.'
{COMPARE SECTIONS I-IIL XI. XXVII.)
* The earliest quotation from this Epistle is probably that in 2 Cleraent,
Justin's apparent references are worthy of notice, and so also are those of Ire
naeus, Clement of Alexandria commented on the Epistle, Origen's testimony may
be ambiguous, as it is said to be, but it is scarcely possible that even Eufinus,
when paraphrasing his original, would invent so many distinct passages as are
found in his Latin version of Origen, See text, p. 62, and references in this
chapter. It appears to have been an adraitted part of Scripture in Origen's
time, although what Eus. H, E, VI, 25 ascribes to him is not less likely to be
correct: "Eotu Se xal SEUTs'pav, Ofji^iPaXXETai yap. This is not a statement of
opinion, but the record of a matter of fact. Eusebius mentions the wide circula
tion of the Epistle, and the doubts of its canonicity, without meeting the diffi
culties involved; but Jerorae argues on the subject. From his day to ours the
Epistle has been generally received, but (at least frora the Reforraation) with
some doubts on the part of raany. Reuss and Hilgenfeld reject it. See Briick-
ner's Commentary in De VPette's Exeget, Handb,
The similarity of 2 Peter to Jude has occasioned suspicion of the genuineness
of both, and also much controversy as to the relative priority of the two Epistles,
The passages Jude 3-16 and 2 Pet, ii. 1-19 are too like to admit of denial that
the one writer had the other in view. On the whole, it seems that there is a
directness and explicitness about Jude which make it likely that he was first: but
although the same illustrations are in both Epistles, the object in view is not the
same. The treatment of the illustrations is accordingly different and independent.
There is no imitation or servile copying. Compare the different use of uKE'poyxa with
and without fjiaTaio'TYjTo;, Jude 6 and 2 Pet, ii, 18; and see auvEUMjoOfiEvoi, Jude 12
and 2 Pet, ii. 13, Both of the Epistles raust have been written at an early date
in the history of the Church, See how Jude 17, 18, uses the prediction also found
in 2 Pet, iii. 3. The immediate Parousia is implied in both, though Jude does not
mention it. This makes for the genuineness of both letters. The disappointment
of that expectation was such as to have prevented a forger (say in the second
century) from recalling it; and the expression of the strong hope of the Church
is characteristic of the apostolic age. In 1 Clem. c. 23 and 2 Clem. c. 11 we have
the expectations of a later time dealt with ; and a singular quotation (called ypacpij
and TcpotpTiTixo; Xoyo;) is applied in both cases. But the position of the writers
of 2 Peter and Jude is quite different from that of Clement and of the preacher
of the Homily called " 2 Clement. " When critics attempt to fix a date after
the Fall of Jerusalem for our Epistles they do not succeed.
If Peter wrote both Epistles, the time which had passed in the interval had
made a change in the circumstances of the persons addressed. In the first he
speaks of external assaults, in the second the danger is from within. It is not
yet from Gnostic or theosophic speculations : it is practical libertinism, lawlessness.
The first Epistle is altogether more Jewish than the second. The Churches ad
dressed have increased more in Gentile than m Jewish adherents since the first
Epistle, so exclusively Jewish in its tone, was penned; and the change thus
brought about goes far to account for the difference in the relation to the Old
Testament in the two Epistles, It is a difference in degree. The Old Testament

BAENABAS. CLEMENT OF ROME. HERMAS. 313
1. Barnabas.^
2. Clement of Rome.
First Epistle.^
Second Epistle.
C. 16. 3. rivwffxcTe de oti sqysrat y8y fj fjfiiqa T^g xqtascog
wg xXi^avog xaiofisvog, '/at raxxjaovrai rtvsg rdiv oiqavwv '/at
ndaa y yy wg fidXi^og snt nvqt rrj'/dfisvog' xat rdre cpavfjaerat
rd xqvcpia '/at cpavsqd s'qya rdv dvdqdnwv. (Comp. 2 Pet. ii. 9 ;
iii. 7.)
3. Hermas. 1
Vis. III. 7. 1. OvToi slatv ol nentarev/dreg fiiv, dnd rs
T^g dtxpvyiag aircov dcpiovaiv t^v b8dv airdv rfjv dXydtvrjv. (2 Pet.
ii. 15.) Vis. IV. 3. 4. Td di xqvaovv fiiqog vftelg sari ol sxcpvydvreg
rdv xdafiov roirov. (2 Pet. ii. 20.)
is still appealed to ; hut the whole tone and substance are less peculiarly Jewish.
We may also note that there are in this second Epistle several points of resem
blance to the Pastoral Epistles of Paul. See the use of £ucjE'(3Eia. Paul seems
to have been still alive (iii. 15). The chief difficulty in holding the Petrine
authorship of both Epistles lies in the apparently different persons addressed, while
yet the second claims to be written to the same persons (iii, 1), But on the whole
we may hold that the growth of the Church accounts for the degree of difference :
the "strangers of the Diaspora" in the first letter are the "equally favdured
Christians" of the second; and the object of both Epistles is that grace and
peace may be multiplied (1 Pet, i. 2 ; 2 Pet, i. 2). But in the second there is the
necessity of seeking that increase of grace and peace by promoting true knowledge
(^TCtyvioai;) of the Personal God and the Saviour. (See Weiss on this Epistle in
Stud, u, Krit, for 1866, p, 255 &c,)
• Barnabas, In Barnabas, c, 2, 3 an echo of 2 Pet. i. 6 may be found; and
in c, 15, 4 (-q yap i^V^P^ '^'P' ObTM xVua ?tt)) a ground of comparison with
2 Pet, iii. 8. The application of the words is quite different in this last case,
Comp, Ps, xc. 4. See below in passages from Justin and Irenaeus.
' Clement. In Clement there are several passages which have been cited as
references to 2 Peter. But they are rather parallels than citations. Thus c. 7. 1
(2 Pet. i. 12-iii. 9); c. 7. 5 (2 Pet. ii. 5); v;, 9, 2 (2 Pet, i, 17); u, 11. 1 (2 Pet. ii.
6, 7, 9); c, 23. 1 (2 Pet, iii. 3, 4),
• Herraas. Corap, on the greed of false teachers Sim, IX. 19. 3 with 2 Pet.
ii. 3 and Jude 16.
' Compare as echoes: Ignatius, Eph, 14, 1. tciotiv xal a'yaTCiriv 'ii'Ti; £(JTiv
opxi) ?ut5; xal t^o; (2 Pet. i, 5-7), Polyc, PhU. c, 3. 2 (2 Pet. iii, 15),

314 second petee.
4. Ignatius and Polycarp.^
5. Justin Martyr.^
Dial. c. 81. p. 308 A. 2vv-rj/afiev '/at rd elqqfiivov, 'on 'Hfiiqa
Kvqiov cog yiXta I'tjj, eig tovto awdyetv.^ (2 Pet. iii. 8; comp.
Ps. xc. 4.)
Dial. c. 82. p. 308 C. "Ovneq de rqdnov '/at xpsvdonqocpfjzat
snt rdiv naq vfilv ysvo fiivwv dyiwv nqotpyrwv yaav, '/at naq'
fjfilv vvv noXXoi slat '/at xpev8o8iSda'/aXot, ovg cpvXdaaeadat nqo-
elnev fjfilv 6 fjfiirsqog Kvqtog. (2 Pet. ii. 1 and i. 21.)
6. Muratorian Canon, Syriac ^ and Old Latin Versions.
See before, pp. 1 and 6.
7. Melito. 1 a.d. 160 (?).
Oration to Antoninus Caesar. (Cureton's Spicilegium Syria-
cum, p. 51.) So also it will be at the last time; there shall be
a flood of fire, and the earth shall be burnt up together with its
mountains, and men shall be burnt up together with the idols
which they have made', and with the graven images which they
have worshipped; and the sea together with its isles shah be
burnt ; and the just shall be delivered from the fury, hke their
fellows in the ark from the waters of the deluge. (2 Pet. iii.
10, 12.)
' Justin, The passages from Justin are peculiar. The first (see before,
note on Barnabas) may be from the LXX, Ps. Ixxxix, but it is used more nearly
in the sense of 2 Peter by Justin than by Barnabas, Justin uses the words in
connection with the warning to Adam, that "In the day he ate of the tree," &c.
The second recalls Peter to some minds by closely associating the Old and New
Testament's experiences of false prophets.
' See before, note on Barnabas,
1 The Syriac Canon did not include 2 Peter. Ephrem Syrus (A,D. 370) ac
cepted seven Catholic Epistles. But this is regarded as a Greek rather than a
Syrian testimony. See his contemporary Gregory's testimony below, in the text.
' Melito's Oration to Antoninus Cassar is found iu one of the Syriac MSS
brought frora the Nitrian Desert by Archdeacon Tattam in 1843, It was edited by
Cureton, printed in 1847, and published in 1855. It does not contain the passage
quoted by Eusebius (H, B. IV. 26), and Cureton supposes that Melito (like Justin
Martyr) twice addressed the Emperor. The Paschal Chronicle seeras to favour this
supposition. See Cureton's Preface, p, viii.

IRENAEUS, THEOPHILUS. 315

8 . Irenaeus.
B. IV. 36. 4. Et temporibus Noe diluvium inducens, uti ex-
stingueret pessimum genus eorum qui tunc erant homines, qui
jam fructificare Deo non poterant, quura angeli transgressores
commixti fuissent eis; et ut peccata eorura corapesceret, servaret
vero arcae typura Adae plasmationera, et temporibus Lot qui
pluit super Sodomam et Goraorrham ignera et sulphur de coelo,
exeraplum justi judicii Dei, ut cognoscerent oranes, quoniara omnis
arbor quae non facit fructum bonum, excidetur et in ignera mit-
tetur: et in universah judicio tolerabilius Sodorais utens, quara
his qui viderunt ejus virtutes quas faciebat, et non crediderunt
in eum, neque receperunt ejus doctrinam. (2 Pet. ii. 4-7.)
B. V. 23. 2. Quidam autem rursus in millesiraum annum re-
vocant raortera Adae: quoniara enira "dies Domini, sicut mille
anni," , non superposuit autem raille annos, sed intra eos raortuus
est, transgressionis adimplens sententiam. (2 Pet. iii. 8.)
B. V. 28. 3. "Oaaig . . . fjfiiqatg iyivsro 6 xoff^ttog, too-
airaig yiXiovrdat avvrsXslrai. Kat 8id rnvrn cpyatv fj yqacp-q'
xat awsrsXiadyaav b niqavdg '/at fj yy, '/at nag o '/oofiog av
rdv. Kat awsriXsasv b Qsdg t^ f/f^^Qf ''^fj s' '^'^ e'loya avroi; a
snoiyas, 'xat '/arinavasv 6 ©eog ev rjj fjfiiqa rfj t' a.nd navrcov
rdv 'sqywv airov. Tovro 8' san riov nqoysyovdrcov diyyqaig, xai
nov iao fiivwv nqocpnrjreia. 'H ydq fjfiiqa Kvqiov dg iji ery sv
E^ ovv fjfiiqatg avvrsriXsarat rd ysyovdra' cpavsqdv ovv, ort y
avvriXsia avrwv to g' erog iariv. (2 Pet. iii. 8.)
9. Theophilus.
Ad Autolyc. IL 9. p. 87. Ol de rov QsoiJ 'dvdqwnoi, nvevfia-
rocpdqot Hveifiarog dyiov '/at nqocprjzai yevdfievoi, vn avrov rov
Qeov ifinvevadivreg '/at ancpiadivreg, iyivovro deodida'/rot '/at
baioi '/at 8i'/aiot.^ (2 Pet. i. 21.)
Ibid. IL. 13. p. 92. 'H 8idraitg ovv rov Qsov, rovro iartv 6
Xdyog airov, cpaivwv wansq Xi'yvog iv om-qfiari avveynfisvci), scpwr-
lasv TIJV vn ovqavdv. (2 Pet. i. 19.)
' Theophilus. Comp. Ill, 12. p. 125, tou; iravTa; TCveu[AaTocp6pou; Evl nvEuiiaTi
0EOU XeXaXTjx^vai, and Justin Dial, c, 7. p. 224 D for a definition of prophets.

316

SECOND PETEE.

10. Clement of Alexandria. ^
Eus. H. E. VI. 14. (See before. Catholic Epistles, p. 289.)
Cassiodor. div. lect. c. 8. (See before, Cathohc Epistles, p. 289.)

11. Origen. 1
Eus. H. E. VI. 25. (See before, p. 8.)
Comment, in Mat. 1. 15. Tom. LLL p. 692. (See above, p. 308.)
Comment, in Ep. ad Bom. B. VIII. Tom. IV. p. 631. (Migne,
Vol. IV. p. 1179.) Et Petrus in Epistola sua dicit: "Gratia vo
bis et pax multiplicetur in recognitione Dei:" et iterum alibi:
"Ut boni dispensatores multiplicis gratiae Dei." (2Pet. i. 2;
1 Pet. iv. 10.)
In Levit. homil. 4. Tom. II. p. 200. (Migne, Vol. E. p. 437.)
Audi et Joannem, quomodo uno eodemque spiritu proloquatur.
"Et societatem," inquit, "haberaus cum Patre, et cum Filio ejus
Jesu Christo." Et iterum Petrus dicit: "Consortes," inquit,
" facti estis divinae naturae," quod est socii. (2 Pet. i. 4.)
In Numer. homil. 13. Tom. II. p. 321. (Migne, Vol. IL p. 676.)
Non xjuod digna (sc. asina) esset videre angelum, sicut nec loqui
digna erat, sed ut confutaretur Balaam: et ut ait quodam in
loco Scriptura: "Mutum animal humana voce respondens, arguit
prophetae dementiam. " (2 Pet. ii. 16.)
In Exod. homil. 12. Tora. E. p. 174. (Migne, Vol.IL p. 386.)
Scio enim scriptum esse, quia unusquisque a quo Vincitur, huic
et servus addicitur, etc. (2 Pet. h. 19.)
' Clem. Alex. In this passage Eusebius says that Clement wrote short exposi
tions of all the Scripture — including the Antilegomeua — not passing by Jude and
the other Catholic Epistles. This is distinct testimony and trustworthy. Cassio
dorus (A.D. 514) in his De Instit, Divin. says the same thing: "Ferunt itrque
scripturas divinas Veteris Novique Testamenti ah ipso principio usque ad jvn&m
Graeco sermone declafasse Clementem Alexandrinum." In another passage, k. 8, . he
limits this by saying: "/« Epistolis autem canonicis, Clemens Alexandrinus pres
byter, qui et Stromateus dicitur, id est in epistola S. Petri prima et secunda, et Ja
cobi q-uaedam Attico sermone declaravit. " But this uncertain statement of a writer
two hundred years after Eusebius could not (even if consistent with itself) over
turn what Eusebius said. We must indeed remember that we do not know the
exact amount of deference Clement paid to 2 Peter; but by raaking an exposition
of it he showed that he counted it in some sense Scripture. See Introd. "Cle
raent of Alexandria, "
' Origen. On Origen's references compare on 1 Peter, note 1. page 309,

FIRMILIAN. EUSEBIUS. ATHANASIUS. CYEIL OP JEEUSALEM. 317
Adamantii dial, de recta fide, sect. 1. Tom. I. p. 821. (Migne,
Vol. I. p. 1760.) Heiaet di ae '/at 6 e'^wdsv Xdyog ' on exaarog
q) Tjrrrjrat, roircj) xat 8e8ovXwrat. (2 Pet. ii. 19.)
Ibid. sect. 2. p. 828. (Migne, Vol. L p. 1778.) Jlij de vnd
Hirqov rov anoardXov yeyqajifiivov xard r-qv adcpiav, cpyatv, rfjv
dedofiivyv rip ddeXipip fiov HaiXii). (2 Pet. iii. 15.)
In libr. Jesu Nave homil. 8. Tora. II. p. 412. (Migne, Vol. IL
p. 857.) Petrus etiam duabus Epistolarum suarum personat tubis.
Comment, in Joann. (See above, 1 Pet. p. 309.)
12. Firmilian.
Ep. ad Cyprian. (Ep. Cyprian. 75.) Adhuc etiara infaraans
Petrum et Paulura beatos Apostolos, quasi hoc ipsi tradiderint;
qui in Epistolis suis haereticos execrati sunt, et ut eos evitemus
monuerunt.1 13. Eusebius.
H. E. III. 3. (See before, p. 207.)
Ibid. Ul. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
14. Athanasius.
De S. Trinit. dialog. 1. Tom. II. p. 411. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 1125.) Kat ev ralg xadoXixalg iniaroXalg yiyqanraf At
dv rd fisyiara fjfilv '/at rifita snayyiXfiara 8s8dqrjzat, 'iva yi-
vyade deiag xotvwvot cpvaewg. (2 Pet. i. 4.)
Contra Arianos orat. I. Tom. I. p. 331. (Migne, Vol. II. p. 45.)
Kat roird ianv o sXsysv 6 Hirqog' "iva yivyade deiag xntvwvot
cpvaewg. (2 Pet. i. 4.)
Opp. t. IL p. 38. (See before, p. 13.)
Synops. Athanas. (See before, p. 15.)
15. Cyril of Jerusalem.
Catech. 4. (See before, p. 19.)
> Firrailian's reference must be to 2 Peter, as in it alone are tlie allusions
to heretics.

318 SECOND PETEE.

16. Gregory of Nazianzum.
Carm. 33. vers. 31.^ .Ka-5-oAfxc5v iniaroXdv Ttveg fiiv snrd
cpaatv, ol de T^etg jidvag yqfjvat 8ixsadat.

17. Epiphanius.
Haeres. IL t. 2. h. 66. p. 678. (Migne II. 129.) "iig cpyaiv
Hirqog iv ry EniaroXy' nqngixovreg np nqocpryri'/ip Xdycjj, tog
Xiyvqr cpaivovn iv avyfiyqip rdnqi, ewg cpwacpdqog avareiXy, '/at
fjfiiqa '/aravyday iv ralg '/aqdiaig vfidv. (2 Pet. i. 19.)
Haeres. LLL t. 1. h. 76. p. 941. (Migne II. 560.) (See be
fore, p. 21.)
18. Jerome.
De Vir. HI. c. 1. (See before, 1 Pet. p. 311.)
Epist. 120. c. 11. (See before, 1 Pet. p. 311.)
Ep. LL. ad Paulin. (See before, p. 21.)
Proleg. 7. Epist. Canon. (See before. Catholic Epistles, p. 290.)
> Gregory, This is a formal catalogue designed to guide his friend. See
before, page 314, on Syriac Canon and Ephrem as regards 2 Peter.

319
XXXL
FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN/
1. Barnabas.
C. 5. 10. (11). El ydq fiy yXdev iv aaqxt, ndg dv iaddqaav
ol dvdqconot §Xinovreg airdv. . . . (See 1 John iv. 2.)
' The First Epistle of John stands or falls with the Fourth Gospel, which it
reserables so closely. Scaliger said in an offhand way : Tres Epistolae Joannis
non sunt Apostoli Joannis. J. E, Lange (1797) was the first to formulate a
doubt of the authenticity of the Epistle while, curiously enough, maintaining that
the Gospel and the Apocalypse are by John. He alleged that it is not genuine,
because there is nothing personal or individual or local about it ; because it is
suspiciously like the work of an imitator of the author of the Gospel ; and be
cause it is a great falling-off from the power of tbe Gospel (see Liicke, III. p. 10).
He farther alleged that if the last is said to be due to John's writing it in extreme
old age, there is a difficulty raised at once, because in that case it must have
been written after the Fall of Jerusalem, while ii. 18 is evidently written before
that catastrophe, Bretschneider held that the three Epistles go together, that they
are the work of John tbe Presbyter; and that the doctrine of the Logos and the
anti-doketic teaching arc of the second century. Bleek denies that the Epistle is
anti-doketic ; and supposes it to be intended to arrest apostacy which arose from
no very definite principles. The history of the fortunes of the Epistle is told in
full detail by Liicke in his ' Commentar fiber die Schriften des Evangelisten Jo
hannes,' Vol, III. In answer to the arguments quoted above it may suffice to say
here that the unprejudiced reader is not likely to agree with Lange's objections;
and that, since Bretschneider wrote, the most recent enquiries have brought into
prominence the existence of the Logos-doctrine in Justin, and so confirmed the
statement of Irenaeus (B. IH, 11, 1) that Cerinthus, a Dokete, was a contemporary
of the Apostle John, Tertullian (De carne Christi c, 24) and Dion, Alex, (Eus,
H. E. VII, 25) believed that Doketae were in view.
The Greek church regarded the Epistle as written in Ephesus, and designed
to meet the wants of the churches around. It was probably written after the
Gospel: its opening words at all events naturally suggest that order. There is
indeed everything to make one suppose that it was written as an outline of Chris
tian doctrine founded on, or flowing from, the Gospel, and therefore not only
subsequent to the Gospel but a companion document. There has been much con
jecture as to Augustine's statement that it was written ad Parthos. And the con
jectures do not clear up the mystery. It seems to have been a slip of Augustine's
or of his amanuensis. Clera, Alex, says 2 John was written itpo; icapSE'vou;; and
this raay have in some way originated the mistake.
But apart from all such questions, the external evidence suffices to show that
this Epistle had an early place in the undoubting acceptance of the Church. Poly
carp, and Papias and the Muratorian Fragment, and the Peshito and Old Latin
Versions, and Irenaeus, and Cleraent, and Origen, make a chain which it is not
possible to break. The Alogi probably rejected it (though the words of Epiphanius
Haer. LI, 3 do not expressly say so), and Marcion certainly did reject it. But so
far as the testimony of antiquity goes, this Epistle is beyond dispute the work of
the Evangehst, John the Apostle.

320 first epistle op john.
2. Clement of Rome.
First Epistle.^
Second Epistle.*
3. Hermas. ^
4. Ignatius. ^
Eph. c. 11. 1. "Eayarot '/aiqoi' Xoindv alaywddfiev , cpo^rj-
d-iofiEV rfjv fiaxqodvfiiav rdv Qsov, iva ftfj fjfiiv sig xqlfia yi
vrjzat. "H ydq t^v fiiXXovaav oqyyv qio^yddjpisv, 'ij rfjv ivsardaav
ydqtv dyan-yawfisv ev rdv 8vo' fidvov iv Xqianp 'lyaov evqedyvai
sig rd dXqdivdv £^v. (Comp. 1 John ii. 18 ; v. 20.)

5. Polycarp.
Philipp. c. 3. 3. '0 ydq sywv dydnyv ficr/qdv san ndayg
dfiaqriag. ' (1 John passim.)
Ibid. c. 7. 1. Hdg ydq, og dv ftfj bfioXoyjj 'lyaovv Xqtardv
EV aaqxt iXyXvdsvai, 'Avrixqtardg ian. Kat og dv jifj
bfioXoyjj rd fiaqrvqiov rov aravqov ix rov dta§dXov iariv '/at og
dv fisdodsvy rd Xdyta rov Kvqiov nqdg Tdg intdvfi'iag, xat Xsyrj
ftrjre dvdaraaiv jifjze xqiaiv eivai, ovrog nqwrdro'/dg iart tov
laravd. (1 John iv. 3; also 2 John 7.)
' Clement, There is no citation in 1 Clement : the following may be echoes :
C, 31. 2. '^ppaan . . . aXrjaeiav 6id tcioteu; nonioa; (1 John i. 6 ; John iii. 21).
C. 49. 1. TtoiTjaaTu Ta tou XpiOToO TCapayveXiJiaTa (1 John v. 1-3; John xiv. 15).
2 The only passage in 2 Clement which may seem to be an echo is one,
c, 6. 9, containing the word 7:apaxXif)To; , but he is connected with just and holy
works; not as in 1 John ii. 1,
» Hermas. Echo : Mand. XII. 4. 3, comp. 1 John iii. 6. 9.
> Ignatius. Corapare as echo: Magnes. 6. 1. o; itpo aiuvuv Ttapa itorpt
(1 John i. 2). It is not at all made out that John connected the coming of Christ
with the Destruction of Jerusalem. The spiritual Antichrist is always in John's
mind. And the arguments founded on 1 John ii. 18 as to the date of the Epistle
(see note' 1 on the Epistle) being insecure, and " the last time " having a mainly
spiritual reference in the Epistle of John, this reference in Ignatius (which seems
to contemplate a coming visible judgement) cannot be connected with John,
> Polycarp, The previous words reraind the reader of the Synoptists when
they speak of the man who loves Christ and his neighbour as one wlio TCeTtXijpuxsv
^vtoXtjv eixaioauvi);. (Mat. xxii. 40.)

PAPIAS. JUST. MARTYE. LETTER TO DIOGNETUS. MURAT. CAN. 321
Ihid. c. 8. 1. ^i' fjfidg, tva ^^ffW|Hev ev aircp, ndvra vn
ifietvev. (1 John iv. 9.)
6. Papias.
Eus. H. E. III. 39. Ksyqyrat d' 6 a^Tog fiaqrvqiaig dnd rfjg
'iwdvvov nqoriqag intaroXyg, xat dnd rfjg Hsrqov bfioiwg.
7. Justin Martyr. ^
Apol. I. c. 32. p. 74 B. Ol niarsiovrsg aircp slatv dvdqwnoi,
iv olg olxei rd naqd rov Qeov aniqfia, 6 Xdyog. (Compare 1 John
iii. 9; ii. 14).
8. Letter to Diognetus.
C. 10. 2. (Justini Opp. p. 500 D.) '0 ydq Qedg rovg dvdqd
novg rjydnyae . . . nqdg ovg dniareiXe rdv vldv avrov rdv fio
voyevfj, otg T^v ev oiqavip §aaiXeiav inrjyys'iXaro, '/at dw'ffei Totg
dyanyaaatv airdv. 'Eniyvovg ds, rivog o'isi nXyqwdyasadai yaqdg;
'^H nwg dyanyaeig rdv oijrwg nqoayan'Tjaavrd ae; 'Ayanyaag de
fitfiyrfjg s'ay airov T^g yqyardryrog. (1 John iv. 9 &c.)
9. Letter of the Church of Vienne and Lyons.
Eus. H. E. V. 1. °0 did rov nXyqwjiarog rfjg dydnyg sv-
eSei^aro, ei8ox'yaag vniq T^g twv d8sXcpdv dnoXoyiag xat rfjv
savrov delvat xpvxxjv. (1 John iii. 16; comp. John xv. 13.)
10. Muratorian Canon.
Si Joannes tara constanter singula etiara in Epistulis suis
proferat dicens in semetipso: Quae vidimus &c. (1 John i. 1).
. . . Epistula sane Judae et superscripti Joannis duas in Ca
tholica habentur. (For context see pp. 6, 7 and notes.)
' Justin, The passage in the text does not seem at aU secure. There is
another passage whicli may be compared: Dial, c. 123. p. 353 B., with 1 John
iii. 1-3. 21

322 first epistle of john.
11. Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
See.pp, 1 and 2. (Both contain 1 John.)
12. Irenaeus.
B. III. 16. 5. Propter quod et in epistola sua sic testifica
tus est nobis (Joannes): "Fiholi, novissiraa hora est, et quem
admodum audistis quoniam Antichristus venit, nunc Antichristi
multi facti sunt; unde cognoscimus quoniara novissiraa hora est.
Ex nobis exierunt, sed non erant ex nobis: si enim fuissent ex
nobis, permansissent utique nobiscura; sed ut raanifestarentur
quoniam non sunt ex nobis. Cognoscite ergo quoniara omne men-
dacium extraneura est, et non est de veritate. Quis est raendax,
nisi qui negat quoniara Jesus non est Christus? hic est Anti
christus." (1 John ii. 18, &c.)
B. III. 16. 8. Et rursus in epistola ait: "Multi pseudo
prophetae exierunt de saccule. In hoc cognoscite Spiritum Dei.
Omnis spiritus qui confitetur Jesum Christura in carne venisse,
ex Deo est. Et omnis spiritus qui solvit Jesum, non est ex Deo,
sed de Antichristo est." (1 John iv. 1, 2, 3.)
Ibid. Jtd ndXiv sv tjj iniaroXfj cpqat' Hdg 6 ntarevwv on
'lyaovg Xqiardg, ex rov Qeov yeyivvrjrai. (1 John v. 1.)
Eus. H. E. V. 8. Mifivyrai de '/at rfjg 'iwd-wov nqcoryg int
aroXyg, ftaqrvqta i^ airfjg nXslara slatpiqwv, bfioiwg 8s xai T^g
Hirqov nqoriqag.
13. Clement op Alexandria.^
Eus. H. E. VI. 14. (See before, Cathohc Epistles, p. 289.)
Cassiodor. div. lect. c. 8. (See before. Catholic Epistles, p. 289,
note 1.)
Paedag. III. c. 11. 82. p. 301. "Amy 8i sartv y dydny rov
Qsov," qiyatv 'Iwdvvyg, "tva rag ivroXdg ryqyawfiev," oiy 'iva
aaivwfiev dXXyXovg iv rip ardfiart' "'/at al ivzoXat airov ^aqslat
oix elaiv." (1 John v.3.)
Strom. II. c. 15. 66. p. 464.^ Oaiverat 8s xai 'Icoavvyg ev
• Clement, In Clement's citations (whether as from John by name or other
wise) there is no trace of doubt as to the authorship and authority of the Epistle.
« It appears from this that Clement knew two Epistles, One of the smaller

tertullian. ORIGEN. 323
rfj fisitovt intaroXjj rag diacpoqdg rdv dfiaqridv s'/8i8daxwv iv
TOVTOig' "Edv rig l'8y rdv ddsXcpdv airov dfiaqrdvovra dfiaqriav
fiy nqdg ddvarov, alryast xat dwast airip ^wrjv" Toig dfiaqr-
dvovat "fifj nqdg ddvarov" slnsv. "san ydq dfiaqria nqdg dd
varov oi nsqt i'/eivyg Xiyco %va iqwT'yay Ttg," x.r.X. (1 Johnv. 16.)
14. Tertullian.
Scorpiac. c. 12. Joannes vero, ut etiam pro fratribus nostris
animas ponaraus, hortatur, negans tiraorera esse in dilectione, &c.
(1 John in. 16; iv. 18.)
Adv. Praxean. c. 15. Denique inspiciaraus, quera Apostoli vi-
derint. " Quod vidiraus," inquit Joannes, "quod audiviraus, ocuhs
nostris vidiraus, et raanus nostrae contrectaverunt de sermone
vitae. Sermo enira vitae caro factus," et auditus, et visus, et
contrectatus, quia caro, qui ante camera sermo tantura in pri
mordio apud Deum patrem, non pater apud sermonem. Nam
etsi Deus sermo, sed apud Deum, qui ex Deo Deus, qui cum
patre apud patrera. "Et vidiraus gloriara ejus, tanquara unige
niti a patre," utique filii: scilicet visibilis, glorificati a patre in-
visibih. (1 John i. 1 ; John i. 14.)
Ibid. c. 25. Caeterura, " De meo sumet, " inquit, sicut ipse
de patris. Ita connexus patris in filio et filii in paracleto tres
efficit cohaerentes, alterum ex altero. Qui tres unum sunt non
unus quomodo dictum est, " Ego et pater unum sumus ; " ad sub
stantiae unitatem, non ad numeri singularitatem. (Corap. 1 John
V. 7, 8.)
15. Origen.^
.Ems. H. E. VL 25. (See before, p. 9.)
Hom. 'in libr. Jesu Nave. (See before, p. 52.)
De orat. c. 21. Tom. L p. 233. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 466.) '0
is supposed to have been attached to the first. (See under Irenaeus on 2 John.)
See other passages in Strom. IV. o. 16, 100. p. 608.
' Origen quotes the Epistle as John's and as catholic. In Eusebius he in
timates that there were doubts regarding the second and third; but of the first
he had no doubt. He uses the phrase "the Epistle of John," which might mean
that he knew no other ; but this meaning is not necessary, Dionysius (Eus, H. E.
VH, 25) speaks of "the Epistle" in one place, while elsewhere he recognizes
both the others. See Westcott, Canon, p, 334 (4t'> edition), 21'*

324 first EPISTLE OF JOHN.
notdv T^v dfiaqriav, tSg cpyatv iv rfj xadoXtxjj 6 Iwdvvyg,
ex rov Sta§dXov iartv, on dn' aqyfjg b 8td§oXog dfi-
aqrdvsi. (1 John iii. 8.) -
Comment, in Mat. t.l5. c. 31. i?. 699. (Migne, Vol. IIL p. 1348.)
'Ariva 8ivaaaL '/araaxevdaai xat sx ryg Iwdvvov 'EntaroXfjg cpd-
ffxovTOg" Hat8ia, saxdry wqa iariv. (1 John ii. 18.)
Ibid. t. 17. c. 19. p. 798. (Migne, Vol. EL p. 1537.) Td dnd
ryg 'iwdvvov '/adoXt'/fjg 'EntaroXfjg ovrwg sxov 'Ayanyrot vvv
rixva Qsov 'sajisv '/.r.X. (1 John iii. 2.)
Comment, in Ev. Joann. t. 2. c. 18. p. 76. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 153.) 'Enst di cpwg dna^anXdg ivravda ftiv b Jwrfjq, sv de
ry KadoXixjj rov airov 'iwdvvov 'EniaroXy Xiysrat 6 ©eog eivat
qptiiig. (1 John i. 5; Origen is writing upon John i. 4.)
Ibid. t. 19. c. 1. p. 281. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 525.) JT^off-
sntrsivst 8e rfjv sig rdv rdnov dnoqiav xat 6 'Iwdvvyg iv rfj
"/adoXtxjj iniaroXfj raira Xiywv b aqvovfisvog rdv nariqa
xat rdv vldv ndg ydq b aqvovfisvog rdv vldv oidi rdv
nariqa syeL. (1 John h. 22, 23.)
16. Dionysius of Alexandria.
Eus. H. E. VII. 25. (See his views below, on Apocalypse.)^
17. Cyprian.
Epist. 28 (al. 25). Et Joannes Apostolus mandati memor in
Epistola sua postraodura ponit: "In hoc," inquit, " inteUigiraus,
quia cognoviraus eum, si praecepta ejus custodiamus. Qui dicit,
quoniam cognovit eum, et mandata ejus non servat, mendax est,
et Veritas in illo non est." (1 John ii. 3, 4.)
Epist. 69 (al. 76). Item beatus Joannes Apostolus nec ipse
ullam haeresin, aut schisma discrevit, aut aliquos speciatim se
parates posuit, sed universes, qui de Ecclesia exissent, quique
contra Ecclesiara facerent, antichristos appellavit dicens: "Au
distis, quia antichristus venit, nunc autem antichristi multi facti
sunt. Unde cognoscimus, quia novissiraa hora est: ex nobis ex-
> Dionysius recognized all the three. See last foot-note.

CYPRIAN, eusebius. ATHANASIUS. CYEIL OF JEEUSALEM. 325
ierunt, sed non fuerunt ex nobis. Si enira fuissent ex nobis,
mansissent utique nobiscura." (1 John ii. 18, 19.)
De bono patient. Quod si et nos, fratres dilectissirai, in
Christo sumus, si ipsura induiraus, si ipse est salutis nostrae via,
qui Christura vestigiis salutaribus sequiraur, per Christi exempla
gradiamur, sicut Joannes apostolus instruit, dicens: "Qui dicit,
se in Christo manere, debet quomodo ille ambulavit et ipse am-
bulare." (1 Joh. ii. 6.) 18. Eusebius.
H. E. III. 3. (See before. The Epistles, p. 207.)
lUd. EI. 24. (See before. The Gospels, pp. 89, 90.)
Ibid. III. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
19. Athanasius.
Contra Arianos Orat. IV. c. 26. p. 505. (Migne, Vol. E. p. 508.)
"Ozi di 6 Yldg oi'/ aqyfjv s'yst rov sivat, aAX' alst xat nqd Tj/g
ivavdqwnrjaecog naqd rep Harqi iart, dqXol 6 'icodvvqg iv rfj
nqcory '.EntaroXfj Xiywv ovrwg- "O yv dn' aqyfjg, o d'/y/da-
fiev, 0 Ecoqd'/afisv rolg ocpdaXfiolg fjfidv , o idsaad-
fisda, xat al yslqsg fjfiwv iipyXdcpyaav, nsqt roi Xdyov
T^g ^tu^g" '/at fj ^w^ icpavsqwdy, xat swqdxafisv '/at
fiaqrvqovfiEv, xat dnayyiXXofisv vfilv tj}v Cwjjv ti^v
aldviov, ^'Ttg yv nqdg rdv nariqa, xat icpavsqwdy fjfilv.
(1 John i. 1, 2.)
Epist. ad Serapion. c. 18. p. 533. (Migne, Vol. E. p. 576.)
OfjTW ydq 6 'Iwdvvyg syqaxpsv 'Edv ayand fisv dXXyXovg, 6 ©eog
ev ^^iiv fiEVSi. 'Ev Tovrcp yivdaxofisv, 'on sv aircp fiivofisv, xai
at'Tog ev fjfilv, on ix rov nvsifiarog airov e'dwxev ^|itiv. (1 John
iii. 24.) Opp. Tom. IL'p. 38. (See before, p. 13.)
Synops. Athanas. (See before, p. 15.)
20. Cyril of Jebusalem.
Catech. 4. (See before, p. 19.)

326 FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN.

21. Epiphanius.
Haeres. 51. (See below, under Apocalypse.)
Ibid. Tom. 1. (See before, p. 21.)

22. Jerome.
De Vir. III. c. 9. Scripsit autem (Joannes) unam Epistolam
. . . quae ab universis ecclesiasticis et eruditis viris probatur.
Reliquae autera duae . . . Joannis Presbyteri asseruntur cujus et
hodie alterura sepulchrum apud Ephesum ostenditur, &c. (See
whole passage before, John, p. 187.)
Ep. II. ad Paulin. (See before, p. 21.)

327

xxxn.
SECOND Am THIRD EPISTLES OF JOHN/
{COMPABE SECTIONS I. II., ESPECIALLY II.)
' These two Epistles have not John's name ; nor any external raark by which
to make their author known to us. The very fact that he calls himself o' Ttpsa-
P\jT£po; sho/ws that he was well known, so well known as to need no further de
scription. If the letters be genuine they must have come from some one of high
reputation; one in whose case the name of "Elder," whioh so many men might of
ficially claim, had become a special terra of affectionate respect. One can understand
how it would be appropriate to the Apostle John in Ephesus, in his old age, the
last living link between those who were with the Lord in the flesh and the men
whose grandfathers were children when Christ died. This fact is the chief difficulty
in the way of ascribing these letters to John the Presbyter. It is scarcely possible
that if there ever was a Presbyter John, who stood so far out of the reach of
being mistaken for some other man that he could use only this designation ' Presbyter '
without needing to add his name, his fame would have passed away leaving only
vague and doubtful traces, not so much in the reminiscences of his contemporaries as
in the half-imaginary historical notes of later ages. It is not in Papias's jottings
nor in Irenaeus's obscure references to one greater than himself, but in Eusebius's
suppositions, that we find the basis of the fame of Presbyter John. There is no
good reason to substitute this half-mythical John for the Evangelist as the writer
of the two smaller Epistles. Polycarp perhaps quotes one of them ; Irenaeus
certainly does, and the Muratorian Canon mentions more than one Epistle, though
the reading is obscure.
There has been controversy about the persons addressed. Is it in each case
a person whom "the Presbyter" loved in truth? That the second Epistle was sent
to the Church generally is not compatible with the salutations from the " children
of her sister, " That it was a salutation from one church to another is possible,
but the words of the first verse, which seem to speak of her as an individual who
shared with the writer and others the privilege of having truth abiding in her,
make it improbable. If a person, then ^xXexTi^ is most naturally taken as de
scriptive, both in her case and her sister's, 'ExXexty] is not a proper name but
a designation. But was her narae Kup(a? or does Kupta mean "lady"? On the
whole, the balance of probability is in favour of the latter supposition ; although
the conclusion is easily opposed, and cannot be proved. Of Gains, to whom the
third Epistle was addressed, nothing is known. Attempts to identify him with
Gains of Macedonia (Acts xix. 29), or with Gains of Derbe (Acts xx. 4), or with
Gains of Corinth (Rom. xvi. 23 ; 1 Cor. 1. 14), are beyond the sphere of historical
inquiry. Both Epistles seem to have been written when the writer was on the eve of
a journey in course of which he would meet his friend. Eusebius (H. E. Ill, 25)
says that the Apostle John made tours of visitation of the churches, aud this
harmonizes with the tradition that those letters were written by the aged Apostle
after his return from Patmos, and at a time when he superintended the churches
of Asia.

328 SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES OF JOHN.

1. Polycarp.
Philipp. c. 7. 1. JTag ydq og dv fifj bfioX'oyy 'lyaovv Xqtardv
EV aaq'/t iXyXvdivai, avrixqtardg ianv. (2 John 7, and 1 John
iv. 2, 3.) 2. Ignatius. ^

3. Irenaeus.
B. I. 16. 3. Iwdvvyg 8s b rov Kvqiov fiadyrfjg, snirsivs rfjv
'/aTa8ixyv avrdv, fiy8i x'^iQSi'*' cxirolg vip' fjfidv Xiysadai /Jod-
Xydeig. "'0 ydq Xsywv airnlg," cpyat, "yaiqstv, xotviovsi rolg
sqyoig airdv rolg novyqolg." (2 John 11.)
B. ILL 16. 8. Et discipulus ejus Joannes in praedicta^ epi
stola fugere eos praecepit dicens: "Multi seductores exierunt in
hunc mundum, qui non fionfitentur Jesum Christum in carne ve
nisse. Hic est seductor et Antichristus. Videte eos, ne perdatis
quod operati estis." (2 John 7, 8.)
4. Clement of Alexandria.
Eus. H. E. VI. 14. (See before. Catholic Epistles, p. 289.)
Cassiodori div. lect. c. 8. (See before, Cathohc Epistles, p. 289,
note 1.)
Strom. LL. 'Ev rfj jisitovL 'EniaroXy. (See before, 1 John,
p. 322.) Adumbrat. in Ep. Joannis LL. p. 1011. Secunda Joannis epis
tola, quae ad virgines^ scripta est, simplicissima est. Scripta vero
est ad quandam Babyloniam Electam nomine, significat autem
electionem Ecclesiae Sanctae.
' Ignatius. Compare as possible echo : Smyrn. c. 10, 1. ijTcoSe^aiJievoi (3 John
5, 6, 8),
1 Praedicta. Irenaeus has quoted the First Epistle just before, and either
makes a slip here, or (as some think) had the second along with the first as one
letter. The readings of Irenaeus in this passage have been confirmed, and, instead
of tbe Text, Rec, Lachmann and Tischendorf read £gifiX3av (for etoijXiiov), aTCoXe-
ar\Tt (for aTCoX^aufiev), eipyaoaaSe (for eipyaoafjieSa),
' Clement. It is perhaps from this (in its Greek itpo; Ilap^^vou;) that the
idea of its being Ttpo; IIap!3ov; originated.

oeigen. dionysius of alexandeia. cypeian. eusebius. 329
5. Oeigen.
Eus. H. E. VI. 26. (See before, p. 8.)
Homl. in libr. Jesu Nave. (See before, p. 52.)
6. Dionysius of Alexandeia. '^
Eus. H. E. VII. 25. (See below. Apocalypse.)
7. Cypeian.
De Haer. Baptis. Aurelius a Chullabi dixit: Joannes aposto
lus in epistola sua posuit dicens: "Si quis ad vos venit, et
doctrinara Christi non habet, nolite eum admittere in domura
vestram, et ave illi non dixeritis. Qui enim dixerit ihi, ave,
communicat factis ejus malis." (2 John 10, 11.)
8. Alexandee Bishop op Alexandeia.
Soc. H. E. I. 6. Kal fiy8s x'dv yaiqsiv rolg roiovrotg Xsysiv,
i'va fiy nors xat ralg dfiaqriaig airdv xotvwvot ysvdfisda, wg
naqyyysiXsv 6 fiaxdqtog 'Iwdvvyg.^ (2 John 10.)
9. Eusebius.
Demonstr. Ev. III. 5. Kat rdv 'Iwdvvyv de ofioiov evqotg av
rip Mardaicff. 'Ev fiiv ydq ralg intaroXalg avrov ov8e fivy
firjv rfjg olxeiag nqoayyoqiag notel y nqea^ireqov eavrov ovofia-
tsi' oi8afiov 8e 'AndaroXov, oidi EiayysXtaryv. 'Ev 8i rip sv-
ayysXicji iniayjiyvdjisvog, ov rjydna 6 'lyaovg, oi'/ i8yXwaev ovo-
fiaart savrdv.
H. E. III. 3. (See before, p. 207.)
LUd. IE. 24. (See before, p. 87.)
LUd. III. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
• Dionysius, It is to be observed that although Dionysius opposed the re
ception of the Apocalypse, and ascribed it to Presbyter John, he never ascribes
the second and third Epistles to that Presbyter, even although the opening words
o" TCpeapuTspo; might have suggested it. Nay, he refers to the 'Presbyter' being
written anonymously at the opening of those Epistles, as though it were charac
teristic of John.
1 Alexander wrote this letter when he heard how Eusebius of Nicomedia
was favouring the Arians,

330 second and third epistles of john.
10. Athanasius.
Opp. t IL p. 38. (See before, p. 13.)
Synops. Athanas. (See before, p. 15.)
11. Laodicene Council, a.d, 364.
(See before, p. 18. 'luavvou a'p'y'.)
12. Cyril of Jerusalem.
Catech. IV. (See before, p. 19.)
13. Epiphanius.
Haeres. L t. 3. h. 34. n. 13. p. 248. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 609.)
Iwavvyg 8s b rov Kvqiov fiadyryg snirsive T'fjv xara8ixrjv airdv,
fiy8i yctiqetv airolg vcp' vfiHv Xiyead^at ^ovXydeig. " '0 ydq Xiycov
avroig," cpyat, "yaiqetv, xoivwvei rolg e'qyoig airdv rolg novyqolg."
(2 John 11.) 14. Jerome.
De Vir. HI. c. 9. (See before, p. 187.)
Ibid. c. 18. (Papias.) Ex quo apparet ex ipso catalogo (iu
Papiae explanatione sermonura Doraini) nominum, alium esse Jo
annera, qui inter apostolos ponitur, et aliura Seniorem Joannera,
quera post Aristionem enumerat. Boc autem dixiraus, propter
superiorem opinionera, quam a plerisque retulimus traditam, duas
posteriores epistolas Joannis, non Apostoli esse, sed Presbyteri.
Epist. II. ad Paulim. (See before, p. 21.)
Epist. Evagrio. Clangat tuba evangelica, filius tonitrui, quem
Jesus amavit plurimura: qui de pectore salvatoris doctrinarura
fluenta potavit: "Presbyter electae domini, &c." Et in aha epis
tola: "Presbyter Caio."

331

XXXIII.
J U D E.^
1. Barnabas. 1
2. Hermas. 1

3. PoLYCAEP.
Philipp. c. 7. 2. Aid dnoXtndvreg rfjv fiaratdryra rdv noX
Xwv '/at rag ipev8o8i8aaxaXiag , snt rdv e^ oiqyfjg fjfilv naqado-
divra Xdyov intarqixpwfiev , vfjcpovreg nqdg rdg eiydg, '/.r.X.
(Jude 3; 1 Pet. iv. 7.)
1 Jude, On the relation to 2 Peter see note 1 on 2 Peter, Jude does not
call himself an Apostle and does call himself the brother of Jaraes, which makes
it improbable that the Apostle Jude was the writer. He was probably brother of
James the writer of the Epistle (see Mat. xiii, 55 ; Mark vi, 3). On his quotation
from Enoch see below, note on Tertullian. The reference to Michael is said to
be from the Assumption of Moses (see Origen, below). Hilgenf., Nov. Test, extra
Can, Eec, has collected the fragments of this book. Others suppose that Jude re
ferred to a current Jewish tradition. The date is to be inferred from the contents.
Verse 17 points to the Apostles as having spoken to the readers of the Epistle. There
is no reference to the Fall of Jerusalera, and this makes for a date before that
catastrophe. We have concluded that 2 Peter, which was before the Fall of Jeru
salem, was later than Jude (see for this also note on 2 Peter), There has been
controversy as to the originai language of the Epistle ; but there is no good cause
shown for its being other than Greek. That the Epistle raade its way to a place
in the Canon shows that it had powerful evidence in its favour at first; for there
is ranch to railitate against it in its first words which claira no apostolical authority,
and in its references to strange traditions. Cleraent never calls Jude an Apostle,
but Tertullian does, and Origen also (in the Latin of his works at least). Though
it is not in the Peshito, Ephrem accepted it.
' Barnabas uses TCapeiaSuaiv, c, 2. 10 and c. 4, 9, so as to remind the
reader of Jude 4 itapEia^Suoav , in similarly describing the stealthy inroads of
false doctrine. The word in 2 Pet, ii, 1 is rcapeiaa^ouaiv, Comp. Gal. ii. 4, TCap-
eiarjXSov, mapEiaaxTOu;, In c, 4, 9 it is t'va (Jltq af^ i:apeto5iiaiv o' (jieXa;, and
the context shows that he is warning against false doctrine and sins of conduct
as closely linked together. So also the Pastoral Epistles.
' Hermas has in Sim, IX. 19, 3 a passage denouncing the false teachers as
beyond repentance because they becarae upoSo'Tai Ttov 6ouXuv tcO QeoC, dia Se
Ti^v ^ra3u(A(av tou XtifjifiaTo; uitepxpOYioav xal £6(8a5av xata Ta; £ra3u(jiia; tuv
a'vdpUTCcav tcov a(jiapTavovTUV. This is parallel to 2Pet.'ii. 3; Jude 16; Titus i. 11.
Compare for Patd's practice 1 Cor, ix. 12 ; 2 Cor. xi. 9-13.

^^2 ' JUDE.

4. MuEATORIAN CaNON.
See before, p. 7, (contains Jude,)
6. Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
See before, pp. 1 and 2. (wanting in the Syriac: contained in 0, L.)
6. Ieenaeus.
B. IV. 36. 4. (See before, on 2 Peter, p. 315; comp. Jude 7.)
7. Clement of Alexandria. ^
Paedag. IIL 44. p. 280. "Eldivai ydq vfidg," cpqatv b 'lov
dag, "^oiXofiai on 6 ©cog dna^ ix rfjg A'iyvnrov Xadv adaag
TO dsvrsqov rnvg fifj ntarsvaavrag, dndXsasv, dyyiXovg rs rovg ftfj
ryqfjaavrag rfjv savrcov aqyfjv, dXXd dnoXindvrag rd 'idiov ol'/y-
Trjqiov sig '/qiaiv fisydXyg fjfiiqag dsofiolg didiotg vnd to(pov
dyqicov dyysXwv rer'rjqqxev." Kal '/azd fitxqdv 8t8aa'/aXixwTara
i'/riderat rdg el'/dvag rdv xqivoftiviov "oiat airolg, on rjj b8cp
rov Kdiv inoqevdyaav '/at ry nXdvy rov BaXadfi i^eyidyaav,
xpri TJJ dvnXoyiif rov Koqi dndXovro." (Jude 5, 6, 11.)
Strom. III. 11. p. 515. "'Ent rnirwv 61 fiat xat rdv bfioicov
aiqiaewv nqocpyrr/wg 'lovdav iv rfj iniaroXfj elqyxivai' "'Ofioicog
fiiv TOL '/at ovrot ivvnviatdfievoi'" (o ydq vniq rjj dXydeicjc ini-
§aXXnvaiv) ecog, "Kat rd ardfia airdv XaXsl vniqoyxa." (Jude
8, 16.) Adumbrat. in Ep. Jud. p. 1007. (Dindorf, Vol. IIL p. 482.)
Judas, qui catholicam scripsit epistolam, frater filiorum Joseph
exstans, valde rehgiosus, quum sciret propinquitatera Domini, non
tamen dixit, seipsum fratrem ejus esse. Sed quid dixit? "Judas,
servus Jesu Christi," utpote Domini, "frater autera Jacobi."
Eus. H. E. VI. 13. (See before, Bebre'ws, p. 277.)
Ibid. VL 14. (See before. Catholic Epistles, p. 289.)
Cassiodor. div. lect. c. 8. (See before, p. 289, note 1.)
' Clement. Cassiodorus says that Clement commented on the Canonical
Epistles, i.e. 1 Peter, 1 and 2 John and James ; but this last is supposed to be
a mistake for Jude. At all events, Cleraent's Adurabrations in Jude are extant in
Latin.

tertullian. origen. 333
8. Tertullian.
De cultu femin. I. 3.^ Scio scripturam Enoch, quae hunc
ordinera angelis dedit, non recipi a quibusdam, quia nec in ar
marium Judaicum^ adraittitur. Opinor non putaverunt illam ante
cataclysmum editam, post eum casum orbis omnium rerum ab-
olitorem, salvara esse potuisse. Si ista ratio est, recordentur
pronepotera ipsius Enoch fuisse superstitera cataclysmi Noe, qui
utique domestico noraine et hereditaria traditione audierat et
meminerat de proavi sui penes Deura gratia, et de oranibus prae-
dicatis ejus: cura Enoch fiho suo Matusalae nihil aliud manda-
verit, quam ut notitiara eorura posteris suis traderet. Igitur sine
dubio potuit Noe in praedicationis delegatione successisse, vel
quia et alias non tacuisset, tam de Dei conservatoris sui dispo
sitione, quam de ipsa domus suae gloria. Hoc si non tara ex
pedite haberet, illud quoque assertionem scripturae illius tueretur.
Perinde potuit abolefactam eam violentia cataclysmi, in spiritu
rursus reformare: quemadmodum et Hierosolymis Babylonia ex-
pugnatione deletis, omne instrumentum Judaicae hteraturae per
Esdram constat restauratum. Sed cum Enoch eadem scriptura
etiam de Doraino praedicarit, a nobis quidera nihil oranino re-
jiciendura est, quod pertineat ad nos. Et legimus omnem scrip
turam aedificationi habilera divinitus inspirari. A Judaeis potest
jara videri propterea rejecta, sicut et caetera fere quae Christura
sonant. Nec utique mirum hoc, si scripturas aliquas non rece
perunt de eo locutas, quem et ipsum coram loquentera non erant
recepturi. Eo accedit, quod Enoch apud Judara apostolura testi
monium possidet.^ (Jude 14.)
9. Origen. 1
Hom. in G-en. (See before, p. 51.)
• Tertullian. Book of Enoch, See Dillmann's Das Such Henoch, 1838. See
also Westcott's article in Smith's Diet., Book of Enoch. Liicke, Einl, in d, Olfeiib,
Joh., p. 89. Tertullian is the only father who gives it a place as Scripture, but it
was well known to Clem, of Alex, and Origen, and apparently to Justin and Irenaeus,
Some count it a Jewish Book written before the Christian era; others regard it
as Christian, The raost common view is an obvious compromise, viz., that it is of
Jewish origin B. C. and considerably interpolated afterwards.
s> i.e., The 0, T, Canon,
s Tertullian's only citation of Jude.
• Origen, in his Com. on Mat. t, 10, c. 17, speaks at sorae length of Jude,

334

JUDE.

Eus. H. E. VI. 25. (See before, p. 8.)
Hom. in libr. Jesu Nave. (See before, p. 52.)
Comment, in Mat. 1. 10. c.l7. Tom. III. p.463. (Migne, Vol. IIL
p. 877.) Kat 'lovdag eyqaxpev 'EniaroXyv, dXiydanyov ftiv, ne-
nXyqwfiivTjv de Ttijv T^g oiqaviov xdqtrog i^qcojiivwv Xdywv, 'dang
iv Tip nqooifiicj) el'qyxsv 'Iqv8ag 'lyaov Xqtarov SovXog, d8eXcpdg
8e 'la'/w^ov. Ibid. t. 13. c. 28. p. 607. (Migne, Vol. IIL p. 1167.) Kat iv
ry Ioi8a EniaroXy, rolg iv Qsip narqt yyanyjiivotg, '/at 'lyaov
Xqtarov reryqyfiivotg '/Xyrolg. (Jude 1.)
Ibid. t. 15. c. 27. p. 693. (Migne, Vol. III. p. 1435.) Kat
ytyvovrat noXXot fiiv rdv oiqaviwv '/at nqwrwv sayarot, sig xqi
aiv fieydXyg fjfiiqag 8safiolg didiotg iv tdcpcp ryqovfievot. (Jude 6.)
Ibid. t. 17. c. 30. p. 814. (Migne, Vol. IE. p. 1569.) El de
'/at rfjv Iov8a nqdaotrd zig 'EniaroXyv, bqdrw ri snsrat rip Xdycji
did ro ' AyyiXovg rs rovg fifj ryq-fjaavzag rfjv savrdv dqyrjv, dXXd
anoXindvzag rd 'idiov ol'/yrfjqiov, sig '/qiaiv fisydXyg yjisqag dea-
fioig didiotg vnd tocpov rerfjqrj'/ev. (Jude 6.)
Comment, in Ep. ad Bom. B. III. Tom. IV. p. 510. (Migne,
Vol. IV. p. 939.) Et nisi hac lege tenerentur, nunquam de eis
diceret scriptura divina: "Angelos quoque, qui non servaverunt
principatum suum, sed dereliquerunt proprium domicilium, Deus
ad judiciura raagni diei aeternis vinculis in tartaro constrictos
sub caligine reservavit." (Jude 6.)
Ibid. B. V. Tom. IV. p. 549. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 1016.) Quo
modo etiara quod Judas apostolus in Epistola Catholica dicit,
poterit explanari? Ait enira ita: "Angelos quoque qui non ser
vaverunt principatura suura, sed dereliquerunt, &c." (Jude 6.)
De Princip. III. 2. (Tora. I. p. 138.) Et primo quidera in
Genesi serpens Evam seduxisse describitur: de quo in Ascensione
Moysi cujus libehi raerainit in epistola sua apostolus Judas, Mi
chael archangelus cura diabolo disputans de corpore Moysi, ait
a diabolo inspiratum serpentem causara exstitisse praevaricationis
Adae et Evae. (Jude 9.)

and of James (Mat, xiii. 65, 56), but does not say that Jude was an Apostle;
nor does he call him the brother of the James who wrote the Epistle, bat of James
the Lord's brother.

EUSEBIUS. ATHANASIUS. CYEIL. EPIPHANIUS. JEEOME. 335
10. Eusebius.
H. E. IL 23. (See before, p. 298.)
Ibid. III. 3. (See before, p. 207.)
Ibid. IE. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
11. Athanasius.
Opp. Tom. II. p. 38. (See before, p. 13.)
Synops. Athanas. (See before, p. 15.)
12. Cyeil of Jeeusalem.
Catech. IV. (See before, p. 19.)
13. Epiphanius.
Haeres. I. t. 2. h. 2. p. 92. 'Iig '/at neqt rovrwv olfiai i'/ivfjdy
TO dyiov Hvsvfia iv np dnoardXii) 'loida, Xiyco 8y iv ry vn'
avrov yqacpsiarj -/adoXi'/jj 'EniaroXy. {'lov8ag 8i ianv ovrog, b
d8sXg>dg 'la'/d§ov '/at Kvqiov Xsyd fisvog-) 'Ynidei^s ydq airnvg
ro dytov Hvsvfia 8id T^g cpwvfjg rov 'loi8a xaTa Ta xtjJvj; cpdei-
qofiivovg xat cpdeiqavrag, dg Xsysi on "Oaa ftiv oix o'i8aaiv
ayvoovvreg dXia'/ovzat' oaa de o'i8aaiv, t&g rd dXnya tdia cpdei-
qovrat.
14. Jeeome.
De Vir. III. c. 4. Judas frater Jacobi parvam, quae de septera
Catholicis est, Epistolam reliquit. Et quia de libro Enoch, qui
apocryphus est, in ea assumit testimonium, a plerisque rejicitur:
tamen auctoritatera vetustate jara et usu raeruit, et inter sanctas
scripturas computatur.
In Epist. ad Tit. c. 1. (Vallars. Vol. VII. p. 708.) Qui autem
putant totura librum dehere sequi eum qui libri parte usus sit,
videntur mihi et apocryphura Enochi, de quo apostolus Judas in
Epistola sua testimonium posuit, inter Ecclesiae Scripturas recip
ere et multa alia quae Apostolus Paulus de reconditis est lo
quutus.^ ' Jerome is arguing against those who objected to Paul's quotation from
heathen writers, KpiQTe; a'el ilJEuaTSt (Titus i, 12); and his argument is that one
who finds some words in a book which suit his purpose and uses them is not
thereby made responsible for the rest of the book.

336

XXXIV.
APOCALYPSE/ 1. Barnabas.^
2. Clement of Rome.^
Second Epistle.
C. 17. 7. Ol 8i 8ixaiot ev'nqayfjaavreg '/at vnofisivavreg rdg
jiaaavovg xat fuayaavrsg rdg fj8vnadsiag T^g xpvxqg, orav dsd-
acovrai rovg aaroyjijaavrag '/at dqvyaaftivovg 8id rdv Xdywv j}
did rdv sqywv rdv 'lyaoiv 'onwg xoXdtovzat detvalg ^aadvoig nvqt
aa^iarcj), eaovrat dd^av ddvrsg rep Qsip airaiv Xiyovzsg orf
'Earat iXntg rep 8E8ovXsv/drt Qsip i§ oXyg xaqdiag. (Comp.
Apoc. xhi. 10; xiv. 12; xvi. 5. G. & H. p. 138.)
3. Hermas.^
Vis. L 3. 2. (See also Sim. IX. 24. 4.) 018a ydq 'on idv
fisravoyaovatv e| 'dXyg '/aq8iag airdv, syyqatpyaovrat sig rag
.* Apocalypse, See afterwards, note "On Chapter xxxiv"; at the end of
the Extracts. ' Barnabas, Corapare as echoes: C, 7. 10 (noSnipY]), Apoc. i, 13; and c. 7.
10 also for reference to Christ's coming again as in Apoc, i, 7 ; c. 21. 3 (ity^i
6 KOpio; xal d (JiiaSo; auTou), Apoc. xxii, 10, 12,
• Cleraent. This seeras to be the only passage in " 2 Clera. " recalling the
Apocalypse. There is none in Cleraent's own Epistle.
' Hermas. The correspondence of Hermas with the Apocalypse of John is
remarkable. Part of it may be ascribed to Jewish sympathies, as e.g. the refer
ences to Michael (Sira, VIII. 3. 3, Apoc. xii, 7), the pre-eminent angels (Vis, V, 4, 1,
Apoc, vii. 2) (which are six in Hermas, but the seventh is the spirit or son of
God, who is also identified with Michael), the prominence given to the destructive
powers of locusts (Vis, IV, 1, 6, Apoc, ix. 3), the delivery of a book containing
the revelation (Vis, II, 4, 2, Apoc. x. 2, 8) ; all of which are found in Jewish pro
phecy and Apocalypses, and which raight therefore be expected in two such
books proceeding from a common source in Judaism, But there are others in
which one borrows from the other, and in which the correspondence is not ex
plained by referring both to Daniel; and the mode of borrowing is significant.
It is not so much leading ideas as the accessories of those ideas which are bor
rowed, We find in Hermas that there is a book of life in which some naraes

HERMAS. 337
§i^Xovg rqg toiqg fisrd rdv dyicov. (Corap. Exod. xxxii. 32; Dan.
xii. 1 : but see Apoc. iii. 5; xiii. 8; xx. 12.)
Vis. L. 4. 1. "Ors ovv iriXsasv dvayivdo'/ovaa '/at fjyiqOq
and rqg '/adidqag, qXdav riaaaqeg veaviai '/at yqav rfjv '/ad-
i8qav '/at dnyXdov nqdg rfjv dvazoXrjv. (Apoc. vii. 1, 2.)
Vis. II. 2. 7. Ma'/dqiot vfielg oaot, vnofiivere rfjv dXiil'iv
T^v iqyofiivqv rfjv fisydXyv. (Apoc. vii. 14.)
Vis. IL 4. 1. Tyv nqsa^vriqav, naq' ^g e'Aa/Jeg to ^t^Xidiov,
riva doxeig eivat; iyw cpqfif Tfjv ^i§vXXav. HXavdaai, cprjatv,
ovx sartv. Tig ovv iariv; cpyfii. 'H'E/'/Xyaia, cpqaiv. (Apoc.
xii. 1.)
Vis. III. 5. 1. Ol fisv ovv Xidot ol rsrqdycovot xat Xsv/ot
'/at avficpcovovvrsg ralg dqfioyalg airiov, ovroi slatv ol dndaznXoi
xat inio'/nnnt xat 8i8daxaXnt xat 8id'/ovoi ol noqsvdivzsg '/azd
ryv asfivoryra rnv QsoiJ '/at iniO'/onyaavreg '/at 8t8d^avzeg -/at
8ia'/ov'qaavTeg dyvdg '/at aejiviog rolg ixXe'/rolg rov Qeoi, ol fiiv
'/exnifiyftivni, ol de sn ovrsg. (Apoc. xxi. 14.)
Vis. IV. 1. 10. Elysv de to dqqiov int rfjg xscpaXqg yqd-
fiara riaaaqa' fiiXav, stra nvqosi8ig xat alfiarco8sg, sira yqva-
avv, sira Xsv/dv. (Apoc. xi. 7; xii. 3; xiii. 1; xvii. 8.)
Vis. IV. 2. 1. MeTa de to naqsXdslv fis rd dyqiov -/at nqo-
sXdelv daet nddag X', Idov vnavr^ fiot naqdivog '/s'/oafiyfiivq,
'/.r.X. (Apoc. xxi. 2; and Hegesippus in Eus. H. E. III. 32.)
Vis. IV. 2. 4. Hiarsiaag on di' oidsvdg dvvy awi}yvai ei
fifj did rov fieydXov xal ivdd^ov dvdfiarog. (Acts iv. 12; Apoc.
xii. 11.)
Mand. X. 3. 2. (See also Sira. VIII. 2. 5.) JTcrvTOTe ydq
are written down and from which sorae are blotted out (Vis. I. 3. 2, Sim, IX. 24. 4,
comp. Exod. xxxii, 32, Dan, xii, 1 ; but see Apoc. iii, 5, xiii. 8, xx. 12), there
is an altar on which prayers aro presented before God's throne (Mand. X, 3. 2,
Sim. VIII, 2, 5, Apoc, viii. 3), the church is built on Apostles and Bishops (Vis.
III. 5, Apoc. XXI. 14), the church is a woman (Vis. II, 4. 1, Apoc, xii, 1), a
virgin (Vis. IV, 2, 1, Apoc, xxi, 2, and Hegesippus in Eus. H. E, III, 32), the
beast had crowns (Vis. IV. 1, 10, Apoc, xiii. 1), and there is great tribulation
coming (Vis. II, 2. 7, Apoc. vii. 14). Salvation is only through oue great sind
holy name (Vis, IV, 2, 4, Acts iv, 12, Apoc, xii, 11), and the East is the sacred
recess of the universal sacred place (Vis. I. 4. 1, Apoc. vii. 2), The central
theology of Hennas (see Introduction, Hermas) is that of the New Testament ;
much of the ethical teaching is that of James or of John; but the accessories
are from the prophecies of the 0. T. and from the Apocalypse, which is so full
of 0. T. prophecy and figure. 22

338 APOCALYPSE.
Xvnyqov avdqdg fj svTSv^tg ovx s'ysi dvvafiiv rov ava^yvai int
rofj dvaiaaryqiov rofj Qsov. (Apoc. viii. 3.)
4. Ignatius. '
Ephes. c. 15. 3. Oi8iv Xavddvst rdv Kvqiov, dXXd '/at rd
'/qvnrd yfidv iyyvg airip iariv. Hdvra ovv notdfisv, dg airov
EV fjfilv '/aroi'/oivrog, 'iva lofisv airov vaot, '/at airdg y iv fjfilv
Qsdg fjfiiov. (Apoc. xxi. 3; comp. 2 Cor. vi. 16.)
5. Papias.^
From Andreas Caesariensis in Apoc. c. 34. Serm. 12. Edit.
Morel. Opp. S. Chrysost. p. 52. Hanniag 8i ovzwg int Xi^swg'
"'Evioig de airdv, 8yXa8y riov ndXat dsicov dyyiXcov, '/at rrjg
nsqt T'qv yyv dtaxoafiyaswg e'dwxev dqyetv '/at '/aXdg dqyetv naq-
rjyyvyae." Kat s^fjg cpyaiv "Eig oi8iv 8sov avvi^y rsXsvrfjaat
rfjv rd^iv aircov. " ^ (Apoc. xii. 7.)
Oecumenius et Arethas, Comment, in Apoc. (Cramer's Catena,
Vol. VIII. p. 360.) Tovro '/at 7zariqwv naqd8oaig '/at Haniov
8ia8dxov rov svayysXiarov Iwavvov, ov '/at fj nqo'/sifiivy ano-
xdXvxfitg, dta^s^atoi' Haniag 8i xat in' airyg Xi^ewg ovrwg
qrqat neqt roi noXifiov, on "elg oi8iv avvi§y rsXEvrrjaai rfjv
rd^tv aircov," olovst rfjv noXsfU'/fjv iyyeiqyatv "s^Xydy ydq b
1 Ignatius. Corapare as echo: Ephes c, 14. 1, a'p^iq ^ui); xal te'Xo; (Apoc.
i, 8; xxi, 6).
• Papias. The testimony of Papias is specially important (see before, p. 53),
If it can be raade out that he, who corae into contact with the early disciples,
perhaps with John himself, recognized the Apocalypse of John, the evidence for
this book becomes at once very strong, Eusebius never says that Papias knew
it (see before, p, 64); and on this silence much has been founded. On the other
hand, Andreas in the fifth century seems to have read in Papias's work that he
quoted the Apocalypse, Whatever may have caused the ' silence of Eusebius ' in
this instance, it cannot outweigh the statement and quotation by Andreas (con
firmed by Arethas), The other parts of Andreas's historical sumraary as given in
the first extract in our text are confirmed by extant documents, and there is no
good reason to doubt what he says of Papias. Besides, Eusebius's words (see
before, p, 56) as to Papias's chiliastic misuse of anoOToXixa; SunyniaEi; really im
plies that there were such SnQyiQaEt; — written accounts — both in Papias's hands
and his own. This at once suggests the Apocalypse, and makes Eusebius imply
what Andreas says explicitly,
2 See Routh,, Rei. Sac, p, 14, Gebhardt u. Harnack, Pat. Apost, I, p. 189;
and Liicke, Einl, in die Ofl'enb., Cap, V. § 30,

PAPIAS. JUSTIN MARTYE. MELITO. 339
8qd'/cov, n fiiyag, b ocpig b dqyalog '/at b aaravdg '/at did(SnXog
'/aXoifievog, '/at ijiX-ydy elg t^v yyv, airdg xai ol dyyeXot avrov."
(Apoc. xii. 7.)
Andr. proleg. in Apoc. (Opp. S. Chrysost. t. II. Francof. p. 175.)
Heqt fiivrot rov deonvevarov rfjg §i§Xov nsqirrdv fiq'/vvsiv rdv
Xoyov fjyovfieda, rcov fia'/aqiwv Iqyyoqiov cpqfii rov deoXdyov,
'/at KvqiXXov, icqnain di '/at dqyatoriqwv Hanniov, Elqyvaiov,
Medndinv '/at InnoXv'zov ravry nqoafiaqrvqnvvccov rd d^id-
niarov.
6. Justin Martyr.
Dial. c. 81. p. 308 B. 'Iig ydq np 'Addfi eiqrjzo, on, y 8'
av yfiiqa cpdyy and rov ^iXov, iv i'/sivy dnod-avsirai, syvwfisv
avrdv fifj avajcXrjqwaavra 'yiXia sry. 2vvfj/afisv '/at rd slqqfii
vov, 'on 'Hfiiqa Kvqiov dg yiXia I'tj;, eig tovto awdyeiv. Kat
s-jcsira '/at naq' fjfilv dvqq Tig, cp 'dvofia 'iwdvvqg, sig twv
dnoardXcov rov Xqiarnv, iv dnnxaXixpsi yevnfiivy aizip yiXia I'tj;
nntfjaeiv iv ' leqovaaXyfi rovg rep fjfieriqii) Xqianp jtiarevaavrag
nqoecpqrevae, '/at fierd ravra rfjv '/aOoXi'/fjv '/at, avveXdvn cpdvai,
alioviav bfiod vfiaddv dfia ndvrwv dvdaraaiv yevqaeadai '/at '/qi
aiv. — JTa^a ydq yfilv '/at fiiyqt rvv nqocpqrt'/d x<^Qiafiard ianv.^
Jerome, Be Vir. III. c. 9. (Joannes Apostolus) quarto decimo
anno, secundam post Neronem persecutionem movente Domitiano,
in Patmos insulam relegatus, scripsit Apocalypsin quam interpre
tatur Justinus Martyr et Irenaeus.^
Eus. H. E. IV. 18. Mifivyrat de '/at [sc. 6 'lovarlvog] rqg
'iwdvvov dno'/aXiipewg, aacpaig rov dnoardXov airyv sivai Xiywv.
7. Melito. ^
Elis. H. E. IV. 26. Tovtwv sig fjfisriqav yvuraiv dcpl/zat zd
1 Justin. This is the first explicit quotation of the Apocalypse in works
which have come to us direct. The circumlocution which Justin was compelled
to use is interesting as an illustration of his difficulty in quoting Christian writ
ings as authoritative. The idea that e!; tuv aTCOOToXtov XpiaToO is an interpola
tion must be referred to subjectivity, the external evidence clearly keeping it in
the text. See on this Lucke, c. V, § 31,
s Justin and Irenaeus are not known to have left comraents on the Apo
calypse, ' Melito was Bishop of Sardis, one of the seven churches. His book is lost.
22*

340

APOCALYPSE.

vnorerayjiiva' MeXirwvog, rd neqt roi nda'ya dvo, . . . Kal rd
neqt rov dia^dXov, xai T^g 'Ano'/aXixpewg 'Iwdvvov.
Jerome, De Vir. HI. c. 24. Melito de diabolo librum unum,
de Apocalypsi Joannis librum unura, etc.
8. Apollonius.^
Eus. H. E. V. 18. Ksyqyrai di '/at fiaqrvqiaig dnd rfjg 'Iw
dvvov Ano'/aXixpswg' '/at vs'/qdv de dvvdfisi deia nqdg airov
'Iwdvvov iv TJJ 'Ecpiacji iyrjyiqdat laroqsl.
9. Letter of the Church of Vienne and Lyons. ^
Eus. H. E. V. 1. Hv ydq '/at san yvfja tog Xqiarov fiadrjryg,
dxoXovdwv np aqvicji onov dv vndyy. (Apoc. xiv. 4.)
Ibid. MdXXov di '/at i^ixasv airdv rfjv oqyyv xaddnsq dy
qiov, '/at rov yysfidvog '/xxt rov drjjiov rd bfioiov sig fjfidg ddi'/iog
E7tt8si'/vvfiivwv filaog- 'iva y yqacpfj nXyqwdjj' '0 dvofiog dvofiy-
adrw 'sn, '/at 6 dixatog 8i'/aiwdijzw en. (Apoc. xxii. 11.)
Ibid. C. 2. AXX sinors ng fjfidv 8t intaroXfjg y 8id Xdyov
fidqrvqag avrovg nqoaslnsv, insnXyaaov ntxqdg. 'H8iwg ydq
naqsywqovv rfjv rfjg fiaqrvqiag nqoayyoqiav rip Xqianp, np ntarip
xat ttXydtvcp fidqrvqt '/at nqwrord'/qj rdv vsxqdv yeat dqyyycp T^g
^w^g Toi; ©eot;. (Apoc. i. 5 ; iii. 14.)
10. Irenaeus.^
B. IV. 20. 11. Sed et Joannes Doraini discipulus in Apoca
lypsi sacerdotalera et gloriosura regni videns adventura: "Con-
versus sum," inquit, "videre vocem quae loquebatur mecura,
1 ApoUonius, an ecclesiastical writer in Asia Minor, wrote against Montanus,
forty years after Montanus began to prophesy,
> This testimony occupies the same ground as that of Irenaeus,
> Irenaeus's testimony is very iraportant. It is clearly for John the Apostle,
The words Domini discipulus in the first extract are to be interpreted with consi
deration of the fact that he also (B. III. 1, 1) calls the author of the Gospel of John
discipulus Domini. The testimony of Irenaeus is much weakened in the opinion
of critics by his ascribing the Apocalypse to the reign of Domitian, It is usual
to give it an earlier date. But Irenaeus is not therefore mistaken. See extract
from B. V. 30. 3. below.

irenaeus. 341
et conversus vidi septem candelabra aurea, et inter candelabra
similem filio hominis indutura poderera, et cinctura ad mamraas
zonam auream. Caput autem ejus et capilh albi, queraadmodura
lana alba, quomodo nix; et ocuh ejus ut flamraa ignis, et pedes
ejus sirailes chalcolibano, queraadmodura in camino succensus est.
Et vox ejus quasi vox aquarum, et habet Stellas septem in raanu
dextera sua, et de ore ejus roraphaea ex utraque parte acuta
exibat, et fades ejus quemadraodura sol fulgens in virtute sua."
(Apoc. i. 12, &c.)
B. V. 26. 1. Manifestius adhuc etiara de novissimo tera
pore, et de his qui sunt in eo decera regibus, in quos dividetur
quod nunc regnat iraperium, significavit Joannes Doraini disci
pulus in Apocalypsi, edisserens quae fuerint decem comua, quae
a Daniele visa sunt, dicens sic dictum esse sibi : " Et decem cor-
nua quae vidisti, decera reges sunt, qui regnura nondura accepe
runt, sed potestatera quasi reges una hora accipient cum bestia.
Hi unara sententiara habent, et virtutem et potestatem suam
bestiae dant. Bi cum agno pugnabunt, et agnus vincet eos,
quoniara Dominus Dominorum est, et rex regura." (Apoc. xvii.
12, &c.)
B. V. 30. 3. Ov8i ydq nqd noXXaiJ yqovov swqddy, dXXd
axsddv snt rfjg yjisreqag yevsdg, nqdg rep riXsi rfjg Aofiertavov
dqxyg. Eus. H. E. V. 8. 'Ev di np nifinrc^ nsqt T^g 'Iwdvvov 'Ano
'/aXixpswg, xat rfjg xpfjcpov T^g TOii dvnxqiarov nqoayyoqiag ovrw
dtaXafipdvsf "Toirwv^ 8e ovrwg iydvrwv, '/at sv ndat 8i rolg
' This is found in the Latin transl, of Irenaeus B. V. 30. 1, as follows : " His
autem sic se habentibus, et in omnibus a-ntiquis et probatissimis et veteribus scripturis
numero hoc posito, et testimonium perkibentibus his, qui facie ad faciem, Joannem vi
derunt, et ratione docente nos, quoniam numerus nominis bestiae, secundum Gh-aecorum.
computationem, per literas quae in eo sunt, sexcentos habebit et sexaginta et sex; hoc
est decadas aequales hecatontasin et hecatontadas aequales monasin (numerus emm qui
digitus [digitos] sex, similiter custoditus, recapitidationes ostendit universae apostasiae
ej-us quae initio, et q-uae iu mediis temporibus, et quae in fine erit) ignoro quomodo
erraverunt quidam sequentes idiotismum, et medium frustrantes numerum nominis,
quinquaginta numeros ded-ucentes, pro sex decadis unam decadem volentes esse. Hoc
autem arbitror scriptorum peccatum fuisse, ut solet fieri, quoniam et per literas nu
meri ponuntur, facile literam Graecam (scil, ^), quae sexaginta emmtiat numerum,
in Iota cyraecorum literam expansam; post deitide quidam sine exquisition^ hoc ac
ceperunt ; alii quidem simpliciter et idiotice usurpaverunt denariu-m numerum : qui
dam autem per ignorantiam ausi sunt et nomina exquirere, habentia falsum erroris
numerum. Sed his quidem qui simpliciter et sine malitia hoc fecerunt, arbitramur
veniam dai-i a Deo."

342

apocalypse.

anov8ainig xat dqyaloig dvrtyqdcpotg rov dqtdfiov rovrov '/eifii-
vnv, '/at fiaqrvqnvvrcov airdv i'/eivcov rdv '/ar' 'dxpiv rdv 'icodvvyv
fioqa'/nrcov, '/at rov Xdynv didda'/ovrog fjfidg on b dqidftdg rnv
nvdfiarng roi dyqiov '/ard T'qv rdv 'EXX-yviov xpfjcpov did riov iv
avnp yqafifidrwv ificpaivsrat." Kat vno'/aza^dg nsqt rov airov
cpaaXttSf "'Hfislg yovv ni'/ dnn'/tvdvvsioftsv nsqt rov dvd ftarog roiJ
avriyqiarov dnncpaivdfisvot /Je/?atwrtxfDg. El ydq s'8sl dvacpa'v8dv
np liv '/aiqcp '/yqvrrsadat rnvvofia airov, 8t' i'/sivov 'dv i^qidy
rov '/at Tj)v anoxdXvxpiv swqa'/drog' oidi ydq nqd noXXnv 'yqd
vov scoqddy, dXXd aysddv int rfjg fjfisriqag ysvsdg, nqdg rip riXet
rov Anfisnavnv aqyfjg." Tavra '/at nsqt rfjg dnn'/aXvipscog larnq-
slrat np dsdqXnfiivii).
11. Athenagoras.
Legatio, c. 36. Kat anoddastv ftiv vofiitstv rfjv yyv rnig
I8invg vs'/qovg. (Apoc. xx. 13.)
12. Theophilus.
Eus. H. E. IV. 24. Kat dXXo nqdg rfjv a'iqeatv 'Eqjioyivovg
rfjv iniyqacpfjv syov, iv cp ex T^g 'Ano'/aXixpewg 'icodvvov xixqyrat
fiaqrvqiaig.^ Ad Autolyc. II. 28. p. 104. Tavrqv rfjv Evav, 8td rd dq-
yfjdev nXavrjdfjvat vnd rov 'dipsiog xal dqyrjydv dfiaqriag ysyov
ivat, b '/a'/onoidg daifiwv, n '/at 2ardv '/aXnifievng , n rdre did
rnv 'dcpeiog XaXfjaag avry, ewg '/at rnv 8ex)qo iveqycov iv rolg
Evdnvaiatofiivoig vn' airov dvdqwnotg, Evav i'/xaXelrai. Jai-
ficov de '/at 8qd'/cov xaXslrat. . . . (Apoc. xii. 3, &c.)
13. Clement of Alexandria.^
Strom. VI. 13. p. 793. Kdv ivzavda inl yyg nqioro'/ads-
8qict fifj rifirjdjj, iv rnig sixnat '/at riaaaqat '/ads8slrai dqdvnig,
' Theophilus, as Bishop of Antioch, gives the testiraony of the Syrian church.
Hcrraogenes was an opponent of Montanism. The book was in such esteem that
it could be quoted as an authority. (See Liicke, Einl. in d. Ofi'enb. c. V, § 32,)
' Clement frequently cites the Apocalypse as Scripture.

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDEIA. TEETULLIAN. CAIUS. 343
TOV Xadv '/qivcov, dg cpyatv iv rjj 'A7roxaXixpst 'icodvvqg. (Apoc.
iv. 4; xi. 16; cf. Mat. xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30.)
Paedag. II. 12. p. 241. Aidoig di dyioig Tr;V avw 'Isqov
aaXfjfi rsrEixia,'}ai naqsiXfjcpafisv, xal rdg ddde'/a rqg ovqavond-
Xswg nvXag nfiioig dnet'/aofiivag Xidoig rd nsqionrov rrjg ano-
aroXt'/yg cpwvyg alvirrsadat ydqirng i'/dsydfisda. (Apoc. xxi. 21.)
14. Tertullian.^
De praescript. haeret. c. 33. Joannes in Apocalypsi idolothyta
edentes et stupra committentes jubetur castigare. (Apoc. ii. 20.) At
in epistola eos maxirae Antichristos vocat qui Christura negarent
in carne[ra] venisse et qui non putarent Jesum esse filium Dei.
Adv. Marcion. III. 14. Nam et apostolus Joannes in Apo
calypsi ensem describit ex ore Dei prodeuntera, bis acutura, prae-
acutum, quem intelligi oportet sermonem divinum, bis acutum
duobus testaraentis legis et evangelii, &c.
Ibid. IV. 5. Haberaus et Joannis alumnas ecclesias. Nam
etsi Apocalypsin ejus Marcion respuit, ordo tamen episcoporum
ad originera recensus in Joannem stabit auctorem.
15. Caius.i
Eus. H. E. III. 28. ra'i'og, ov cpwvdg 'ydy nqdrsqov naqa-
ridsifiai, iv rjj cpsqojisvy airov tyryasi, ravra nsqt rov avrov yqd
cpst • 'AXXd '/at K'Tjqtvdog b dt dno'/aXixpewv cog vnd anoaroXov
fisydXov ysyqcffi fiivwv, rsqaroXoyiag yfilv, dg dt ayyiXwv avrcp
dedeiyjtivag, ipev8dfievog, ineiadyei, Xiywv, fisrd t^v avctorafftv
iniysiov eivat rd ^aaiXsiov rov Xqiarov, xat ndXiv inidvjiiatg
» Tertullian's citations of the Apocalypse are not affected one way or other
by his Montanist views. He consistently treated it as Scripture.
• Caius. It appears that Caius was an Anti-Montanist opponent of the Apo
calypse, and denied that it was the work of the Apostle John, ascribing it on
the contrary to Cerinthus. That Cerinthus wrote an Apocalypse is not said by
other writers of the period. Theodoret (Fab, Haeret, 2, 3) says: KilpivSo; xal
artoxaXu4iei; Ttvdt; tS; auTo; TsSEafi^vo; ^TCXdaaTO, xal otTtEiXuv tivwv 8i8aaxaX(a;
(juv£3t)xe, xal KoC Kupiou tt^v faaiXEtav I'qpijasv imyiiot i'oEaSai, x.t.X, But this
obscure statement is not accepted, seeing it seeras to be founded on a raiscon-
ception of Eusebius. 'Visions' put forth as though 'written by a great Apostle'
— that is Caius's description of the Johannine Apocalypse, which (from the neces
sities of controversy) he ascribes to Cerinthus.

344 APOCALYPSE.
xat ydovalg sv 'IsqovaaXfjfi t^v adqxa noXirevofiivyv dovXsvsiv.
Kat i'ydqdg vndqywv ralg yqacpalg rov Qsov dqidfidv yiXtovra-
sriag iv ydftcj) soqryg, diXwv nXavdv, Xiyst yivsadat.
16. Muratorian Fragment.
(See before, pp. 3-8.)
17. Syriac and Old Latin Versions.
(See before, pp, 1. 2)
18. Origen.*
Hom. in libr. Jesu Nave. (See before, p. 52.)
Eus. H. E. VL 25. (See before, p. 8.)
Comment, in Mat. t. 16. Tom. IE. p. 719. (Migne, Vol. III.
p. 1386.) E't ys systv Xdyov rd roiovrov dd^ai not, nsncoxaai de
norfjqiov '/at To ^dnriOfia i^anriadyaav o'i rov 'Zs^sda'iov vlot,
insinsq 'Hqd8yg fiiv dni'/rsivsv 'ld'/co[iov rdv 'Iwdvvov fiayaiqa' b
8i 'Pcofiaiwv fiaatXsvg, cog fj naqdSoatg 8i8da'/si, xarE8ixaae rdv
'icodvvyv fiaqrvqnivra did rdv T^g aXydeiag Xdynv elg Hdrfinv rfjv
vyaov. Aidda'/ei de rd neqt rov fiaqrvqiov eavroi 'iwdvvyg, fiy
Xiywv rig avrdv '/aredixaae, cpda'/wv iv ry Ano'/aXvxpei ravra' Eyd
'iwdvvyg b ddeXcpdg vfidv, xat avyxoivavdg sv rjj dXi
xpst, xat ^aatXsia, /at vnoftovjj sv 'lyaov, sysvdfiyv iv
ry vyaw rfj xaXovfiivy Hdr fic^, did tov Xdyov rov Qeov,
xat rd s^yg' '/at soi'/s Tfp> dno'/dXvxpLV iv rjj vqaio rsdswqaxs-
vai. (Apoc. i. 9.)
Comment, in Joann. t. 1. Tom. IV. p. 16. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 47.) Oyaiv ovv iv rjj 'AnoxaXvxpsi b rov Zsfiedaiov 'Iwdvvqg'
'/at eidov dyyeXov nerdjievov iv fieaovqavyfian, s'yovra svayyiXiov
aldviov, siayyeXiaaadat int roig xadyfiivovg int rfjg yfjg, x.r.X.
(Apoc. xiv. 6, 7.)
Comment, in Joann. t.2. Tom. IV. p. 55. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 117.)
KaXcog fiivrot ys dtayqdcpwv rd nsqt rov Adyov rov Qsov iv rjj
• Origen supposes the Apocalypse to have been seen by John the son of
Zebedee. He was not a Millenarian, but he was a Critic, and his support of
tbe ordinary tradition is therefore valuable.

HIPPOLYTUS. DIONYSIUS OP ALEXANDRIA. 345
Ano'/aXvxpEi b anoaroXog, '/at 6 siayysXiaryg, ydy de '/at did T^g
ano'/aXvxpscog '/at nqocp-ijryg, cpqat rdv rov Qsov Adynv swqaxivat
sv dveiiiydri np oiqavcp, icp 'innur Xsv/ip dyov fisvov. (Apoc. xix. 11.)
19. Hippolytus.*
Canon Paschal. 'Yniq rov '/ard 'Iwdvvqv siayysXiov xat
'Ano'/aXvxpEwg. Ebedjesu catal. libr. Syr. c. 8. Sanctus Hippolytus martyr
episcopus coraposuit librum de dispensatione . . . et apologiam
pro Apocalypsi et Evangelio Joannis apostoli et evangelistae.
De Christo etAnfichr. c. 36. (Lagarde p. 17.) Tavra jiiv nqn-
cpyrsist ant 'Haa'Cag, 'idwfisv 8i el rd 'djinia airiov icpdiy^arn b
Iwdvvyg. Ovrog ydq ev HdrfiCji ry vqaijj wv, bq^ 'AnoxdXvxpiv
fivaryqiwv cpqi'/riov, dnva 8tyyovfievog acpddvwg '/at sriqovg di-
ddaxsi. Aiye fioi, fiaxdqie 'Iwdvvy, dndaroXe '/at fiadyrd rov Kv
qiov, ri sldsg /at y'/ovaag nsqt Ba^vXcovog, yqyydqyaov xat sins'
xat ydq air'y as i^dqias. "Kat yXdev eig ex tcSv ejTTa ayyiXwv
riov iydvrwv rdg snrd cpidXag," x.r.X. (Apoc. xvii. 1-18.)
Jerome, De Vir. III. c. 61. Scripsit (sc. Eippolytus) nonnullos
in scripturas commentarios, e quibus hos reperi: in Bexaemeron
. . . de Apocalypsi, &c.
20. Dionysius of Alexandria.*
Eus. H. E. VII. 10. Avdig d'y ovv b Aioviaiog oia '/at nsqt
roirov (sc. OiaXsqtavoi) dii^siaiv, ex T^g nqdg 'Eqjidfifiwva ini-
' Hippolytus. There was found on a statue in Eome in 1551 an inscrip
tion (quoted extract No. 1) giving a list of his works which extract No, 2 con-
firras. The work against Heresies, recently discovered, often refers to the Apo
calypse, In his miscellaneous works which remain, Hippolytus makes frequent
allusion to the Apocalypse. See Lagarde's Index, He usually calls him John,
On one occasion he says that as Christ's first appearing (Ttapouota) had John the
Baptist as forerunner, so will His second, when He cometb in glory, manifest
Enoch and Elias and 'Ia)avvif)v tov SEoXo'yov (llspl ttj; ouvteXeio; tou xo'ufjiou,
§ 21. p. 104); in another (ibid, § 28, p. 110), speaking of the mystic 666, he con
fesses that he does not understand tbe symbolism, but suggests apvoij|jiai (spelt
apvcu|Ji£), inasmuch as it is the characteristic of the adversary to deny.
' Dionysius argues that the Book cannot be by the Apostle John, because
it is not tbe custom of that John to name himself in his writings, while the seer
of fhe Apocalypse does often and emphatically name himself He also founds

346

APOCALYPSE.

ffToA^g fiad-elv sartv, iv fj tojJtov tffTopei rqnrcov "Kat np 'Iwdvvy
'/at Ofioiwg dno'/aXinrsrat. Kat iSddy ydq aircp, cpqat, ardfia
XaXofJv fisydXa '/at (iXaacpqfuav , xai idddy ainp i^ovaia '/at
fiyvsg Tsaaaqd'/ovra dio. 'Aficpdrsqa ds ianv int OiaXsqtavoi
davfidaai.''^ (Apoc. xiii. 5.)
Ibid. VII. 24. (Occasion of Dionysius vvriting on the Apo
calypse.) Ent Toiroig dnaatv anov8d^srat aircp '/at rd nsqt
inayysXiwv 8io avyyqdfifiara. 'H 8i vnddsaig ainp Ninwg yv
snio'/onog twv xaT ^i'^^tttov, 'lovdctixwrsqov rag snyyysXfis-
vag rolg dyioig iv ralg dsiaig yqacpalg inayysXiag dno8od'yaE-
adat dtdaffxwv, '/at nva yiXtdda iriov rqvcpfjg awfianxyg ent
T^g ^jy^ag Tai;'Tj;g saeadat vnondifievog. Ad^ag yoiv ovrog
ex T^g Ann'/aXvxpecog Iwdvvov rfjv I8iav xqarvvsiv vndXqxpiv,
dXeyyov aXXrjyoqiardv, Xdyov rtvd jzsqt rovrov avvrd^ag sniyqaxps.
Hqdg ov 6 Atovvaiog iv rolg nsqt snayysXtwv iviararai, did fiiv
rnv nqoriqov rfjv avrov yvwfiyv yv siys nsqt rov 86yfiarog na-
qaridifisvog, 8id 8i rov 8svTiqov nsqt rfjg 'Ano'/aXvipswg 'icodv
vov 8iaXafi^dvwv' svda rov Ninwrog xard r-fjv aqyfjv jivyfiovsv-
aag, raira neqi airov yqdcpet, '/.r.X.^
Ibid. VII. 25. (Dionysius disagrees with those who would set
the Apocalypse aside.) Eld' e^fjg vno^dg neqt T^g 'Ano'/aXvxpeiog
'iwdvvov raird cpyat' "Tivig ftiv ovv rdv nqd fjfidv ydiryaav
'/at dvea'/siaaav ndvry rd ^i^Xiov, xad' s'/aarov xscpdXatov dtsv-
dvvovrsg, dyvwardv rs '/at davXXdytarov anocpaivovreg, xpeideadai
re Tj)v iniyqacpfjv. 'iwdvvov ydq oix eivat Xiyovatv dXX' oi8'
'Ano'/dXvxpiv sivat, ryv acpddqa '/at nayel xe'/aXvfifiivrjv np T^g
dyvot'ag naqanerda fiart' '/at ovy omog riov anoardXwv nvd, aXX'
oid' oXwg riov dyiwv 'ij twv dnd T^g ex'/Xyaiag roirov ysyovivat
noiyryv rnv avyyqd fi ftarog' Kyqivdov de tov xat an' i'/eivov '/Xy-
delaav Kyqivdtavfjv avaryadjievov aXqeatv, d^tdniarov intcpyfiiaat
dsXfjaavra rep savrov nXdafian 'dvofia. Tovro ydq eivat rfjg
8i8aa'/aXiag airov rd ddyfia, iniysiov sasadai rfjv roi Xqtarov
^aatXsiav, /at cov airdg wqiysro cpiXoawfiarog iov '/at ndvv aaq-
on the difference in style and thought — especially on the different character of
the Greek — and indeed anticipates raost of the raodern objections on internal
grounds. He ascribes the composition to the other John whose tomb is in
Ephesus, 2 Here Dionysius speaks of the work of Nepos, and of its dangerous
character.

DIONYSIUS OF ALEXANDEIA. 347
xtxog, ev rcYvroig nvsiqonoXslv sasadai, yaarqdg '/at rdv vnd
y aariqa nXyOfiovalg, rovriari airioig '/at norolg '/at ydfinig, '/at
dt wv svcpyfinrsqov ravra ojqdrj nnqisladat, enqralg xat dvaiaig
'/at 'isqsicov acpayalg. Eyco 8i ddsrfjaat fiiv oix dv roXfiqaaifit
TO ^i^Xiov, noXXcov avrd did anovdfjg iydvrwv adsXcpdv, fisit,nva
di rfjg iftavrov ipqnvfjaswg tijv V7i:nXyxf.ii'v rfjv nsqt airnv Xafi(id-
vcov, '/s'/qvfifiivyv sivai nva '/at davfiaatwriqav t^v xad' 's'/aarnv
i'/8oyyv vnoXafi^dvw. Kat ydq sl fiy awiyfit, dXX' vnnvnd ye
vvv nvd (iadireqnv iyxeiadat rnig qfjfiaaiv. Oir/ 18 ioj ravra fis-
rqdJv '/at '/qivwv Xoyiaftip, niazsi de to nXinv vificov, vxpqXnrsqa
y vn' Eftov xaraXyipdyvai vevofw/a' '/at oi'/ dno8o'/ifidt,co ravra
a fifj awedqa'/a davfid^eo de fidXXov 'on fifj '/at eidov."
(John the Son of Zebedee never naraes hiraself, but this John
names himself often.) 'Ent rovroig tjjv 'dXyv rfjg 'AnoxaXvxpewg §a-
aaviaag yqacpfjv, ddivarov di airfjv '/ard rfjv nqdysiqov dnodsi^ag
vosladat dtdvoiav, inicpiqst Xiywv " ^vvzsXiaag 8fj ndaav, dg sl
nslv, rfjv nqocpyrsiav, fta'/aqi'QEi b nqocpfjzyg rovg rs cpvXdaaovrag
airyv, xat 8y '/at savzdv. Ma/dqiog ydq cprjatv b ryqiov rovg Xdyovg
rfjg nqocpyrsiag rov §t§Xlnv rnvrov ' Kdyd 'iwdvvyg 6 ^Xinwv '/at
a'/oiwv raira. KaXsladat fiiv ovv avrdv 'Iwdvvyv, xat slvai rfjv
yqacpfjv 'iwdvvov ravzyv, oi/ dvrsqw. 'Ayiov fiiv ydq sivai nvog '/at
deonvevarov avvatvio. Ov fiiv qccdiwg av awdeifiqv rovrov eivat
rdv dndaroXov, rdv vldv Zs^edaiov, rdv ddeXcpdv 'lar/d^ov, ov rd
evayyiXiov to xaTa 'Iwdvvyv sntyeyqafifiivov '/at y iniaroXfj y
'/adoXi'/fj. Tsxfiaiqofiat ydq sx rs rov ydovg sxarsqwv, xai rov
rdv Xdywv e'idnvg, '/at rfjg roi (it^Xiov die^aycoyfjg Xeyofiivqg, fiy
rdv airdv eivat. '0 fiiv ydq eiayyeXtaryg nidafiov rd 'dvofia ai
rov naqeyyqdcpet, oidi '/yqvaaet savrdv, nvrs did rnv eiayyeXiov,
o'vre 8id T^g intaroXfjg." Eid' vno^dg, ndXtv "'Iwdvvqg 8s
ov8afioi oi8i tjg neqt savrov oi8s cog nsqt sriqov b de tijv
Ano'/dXvxpiv yqdipag, svdvg rs iv dqyfj savrdv nqordaast' 'Ann-
'/dXvxpig lyaoi Xqtarnx) yv sdwxsv aircp 8sl§at rolg 8oiXoig ai
rov iv rdyei. Kat iafjfiavev dnnareiXag Sid rov dyyiXov airov
np 8oiXci) avrov 'icodvvy, og ifiaqriqyas rdv Xdyov rov Qsov xat
rfjv fiaqrvqiav avrnv oaa sJdsv. Eira '/at iniaroXyv yqdcpet'
Icodvvqg raig snrd i'/'/Xqaiatg ralg iv rjj 'Aaicf, ydqig vfilv xat
elqyvq. '0 di evayyeXiarqg oidi r-qg '/adoXi'/fjg intaroXfjg nqo-
iyqaxpev savrov rd 'dvofia, dXXd dnsqifrdg a,n' airoi- toC fiva-

348 APOCALYPSE.
ryqiov T^g ^eiag (jTroxa^iJi/^ewg jjg^aTO* 0 yv an' aqxyg, o
cr/y/nafisv, o swqdxafisv rolg dipdaXfiolg yfidv. 'Ent rairy ydq
rjj dnoxaXixpst '/at b Kvqiog rdv Hirqov sfia/dqtasv , slnwv,
Mcr/dqing st 2ifiwv ^dq 'iwvd, on adq^ xat atfia oi'/ dns'/dXvxps
aot, aXX b naT'fjq fiov b oiqdviog. 'AXX' oi8£ iv rjj 8evTEqce
cpsqofiivy 'iwdvvov '/at rqiry, '/ai roi §qaysiatg ovaaig iniaroXalg,
0 Iwdvvyg nvofiaart nqdxsirai, dXX' dvwvvfiwg 6 nqea^xjreqng
yiyqanrai. Ovrog di ye oidi avraq'/eg evdfiiaev, eladna^ savrdv
dvofidaag, diyysladai rd s^fjg, dXXd ndXiv dvaXaji^dvst. 'Eyd
Icoavvyg b adsXcpdg vfiiov, '/at avy/oivcovdg iv ry dXixpst '/at /?a-
aiXsic^ xat iv vnofiovjj lyaov, iysvofiyv iv ry vfjac^ rjj '/aXovfiivy
Harfiio, did rdv Xdyov rov Qsov '/at t^v fiaqrvqiav lyaov. Kat
dfj '/at nqdg np riXst ravra sins' Ma'/dqiog 6 ryqwv rovg Xo
yovg rfjg nqocpyrsiag rov fit^Xiov roirov. Kayw 'icodvvyg b /JAe'-
ncov '/at d'/ovwv ravra.
(There must have been many Johns, but this author does not
say which John he was.) "On fiiv ovv 'icodvvyg iartv 6 ravra
yqdcpwv, ainp Xiyovri niarsvTsov' nolog de ovrog, d8yXov. Oi
ydq sinsv sax/cdv sivai, tSg ev np svayysXiq) noXXayov, rdv fjya-
nyfiivov vnd rov Kvqiov fiadyrfjv, oidi rdv avansadvra int rd
arfjdog airov, oidi rdv 'la'/w^ov ddsXcpdv, oidi rdv avrdnryv '/at
avrfj'/oov rov Kvqiov ysvdfisvov. Erne ydq dv rt rovnov twv
nqodsdyXwfiivwv , aacpwg savrdv ificpaviaat ^ovXdfisvog. 'AXXd
roirwv fiiv ovdiv. 'AdsXcpdv di fjficov '/at avy/otvwvdv ems xat
fidqrvqa 'lyanv, '/at fia'/dqtov snt ry d-ia '/at axojj rdv dno-
xaXvxpswv. HoXXoig di bfiwvifiovg Iwdvvy np anoardXij) vofii^w
ysyovivat, nt did rfjv nqdg ixeivov aydnyv, '/at rd davfidt,etv xat
t,yXovv, dyanydfjvai re bfioiwg avrcp ^oiXsadai vnd roi Kvqiov,
'/at rfjv in WW fiiav rfjv airyv yandaavro. "Qansq '/at b HavXog
noXvg xat dfj '/at 6 Hirqog iv rolg nov ntardv naiatv ovofid-
'C.erat. (John Mark was not the author. Two tombs at Ephesus.)
'EffTt fiiv ovv '/at 'srsqog 'icodvvyg iv ralg Hqd^eai rdv dno
ardXcov 0 ini'/Xydetg Mdq'/og' ov Baqvd^ag '/at HavXog eav
rolg avfinaqiXa§ov , neqt ov '/at ndXiv Xiyet' etynv di xat 'Iw
dvvyv vnyqiryv. El di ovrog b yqdxpag iartv, oi'/ dv cpaiyv
oidi ydq dcpiydai avv airolg elg rfjv 'Aaiav yiyqanrai' dXXd,
"'Avaydivrsg fiiv," cpyatv, " ctnd ryg Hdcpov ol nsqt HavXov rjX-

DIONYSIUS OP ALEXANDEIA. 349
•5-ov eig Hsqyyv T^g HaficpvX'iag. 'Iwdvvqg di dnoywqqaag ayt'
anTtijv, vniarqsxpsv sig 'isqoadXvfia." "AXXov di nva nifiai riov
EV 'Aaice yevn fiivwv inet xai 8in cpaatv iv 'Etpiacji yeviadat fivq-
fiara, '/at s'/dreqov 'Iwdvvov Xiyeadat.^ Kat dnd TtSv voyfidrcov
de '/at dnd rdv qyfidrwv '/at rfjg awrd^ecog airwv, el'/drwg 'ere-
qog ovrog naq' i'/sivov vnovoydfjaerat.
(Agreement between Gospel and Epistles.) Iwddovai fiiv ydq
aXX-qXoig rd evayyiXiov '/at y sntaroXfj, bfioiwg rs dqyovrat. Td
fiiv cpqaiv, 'Ev dqyfj yv 6 Xdyog, fj di, °0 ^v djt' dqyyg. Td fiiv
cprjatv Kat b Xdyog adq^ iyivero, '/at ia'/ijvwasv iv fjfiiv, xat
ideaadfieda rfjv dd^av airov, dd^av, dg fiovoyevovg naqd na
rqdg' fj di rd aird aftiy.qip naqqXXayfiiva' "O d'/y/dafiev , o
swqd'/afisv rolg ocptdaXfiolg fjfidv, o idsaadfisda, '/at al yslqsg
fjficov siprjXdcpyaav , nsqt rov Xdyov T^g ^w^g- xai fj ^wfj icpav-
sqwd-y. Taira ydq nqoava'/qoisrat diarsivd fisvog, cjg ev Totg
e^^g idfjXwas nqdg rovg oi'/ iv aaqxt cpdaxovrag iXyXvdivat rdv
Kvqiov dt' a '/at awfjxpsv snifisXcog, Kat o sco qd'/a fisv , fiaq-
rvqoifiEV, '/at dnayyiXXofiev vfilv t^v ^w^v t^v alwvtov, fjztg yv
nqdg rdv nariqa, '/at icpavsqddq fjfilv o swqd'/afisv '/at d'/q'/-
dafiev, dnayyiXXofiev vfilv. "Eyerat avrov, '/at rcfiv nqodiaewv
oix dcpiararat. Aid di rdv airdv '/ecpaXaiwv xat dvofidrwv
ravra dis^iqysrai' cov nvd fiiv yfislg awrdfiwg vnofivfjaofisv.
'0 de nqoasydg ivrvyydvwv svqrjast iv k/ariqco noXXfjv rqv Liofjv,
noXv TO cpdg, dnorqonyv rov axdzovg, avvsyfj rfjv dXydstav, rfjv
xdqti', rfjv x^Q^'*'^ '^^v adq'/a '/at rd atfia rov Kvqiov, rfjv '/qiatv
'/at rfjv acpsatv rdv dfiaqridv, rfjv nqdg fjfidg aydnyv rov Qsov,
rfjv nqdg dXXfjXovg fjfidg dydnyg svroXyv, dg ndaag del cpvXda
aeiv rdg ivroXdg' 6 sXsyyog rov '/da fiov, rov dta^nXnv, rov dvzi-
yqiarov, y inayysXia roi 'Ayiov Hvsvfiarog, fj vloOsaia zov Qsov,
fj didXov niang fjfiiov dnairovfiivq, b naryq xat 6 wtog navra
yov' xat bXwg did ndvrwv ^a^axTJ/giCovrag, sva xat rdv airdv
awoqav rov rs siayysXiov '/at T^g sniaroXyg yqioza nqd/strai.
(Apocalypse quite different, especially in phraseology.) AX-
' Dionysius has no great certainty regarding the two tombs. When he dis
misses the idea of John Mark being the author of the Apocalypse, he puts for
ward John Presbyter very modestly — oZ.uai — he cannot speak positively. Nor is
his diffidence unnatural when we see that his only evidence is that there were
two tombs in Ephesus, as Eusebius also records. But how Dionysius concludes
that the words and the coraposition betokened ' this other ' John does not appear.

350 APOCALYPSE.
Xninrdry 8i xat ^e'vjj naqd ravra y 'Ano'/dXvxptg, fiyrs scpan-
rofiivq, fifjzB ystrvidiaa rovrwv fiq8svt axsddv dg slnslv, fiydi
avXXa^yv nqdg avrd '/oivfjv syovaa' dXX' oiSi fivfjfirjv nvd, aids
svvoiav, OVTE fj iniaroXfj rfjg 'Ano'/aXvxpewg eyei' id ydq rd
svayyiXinv ovrs ryg intarnXyg fj 'AnoxdXvxpig' HavXov did rdiv
sniaroXdv vnocpfjvavrdg rt '/at nsqt tcDv dno'/aXvxpswv aizov,
ag OV'/ EviyqaxpE xad' avrdg. "En di '/at rfjg cpqdaswg t^v dia-
cpoqdv iart rs'/fvyqaadat rov siayysXiov /at T^g iniaroXfjg nqng
TIJV Ano'/dXvxpiv. Td ftiv ydq oi fidvov dnraiarwg '/ard t^v
'EXXr'jvcov cpcovfjv, aXXd xat Xoyicorara ralg Xi^sai, rolg avXXo-
yiofiolg, ralg awrd^eai ryg sqfiyvsiag yiyqanrai. HoXXov ys dsl
(idq^aqdv Tiva cpddyyov, 'y aoXot'/iapidv 'y 'dXwg Idiwnafidv sv ai
rolg s'vqsdfjvai. 'E'/drsqov ydq sJysv, dg soi'/s, rdv Xdyov, dficpo-
riqovg avnp yaqiaafiivov rov Kvqiov, tov re rqg yvwaswg, rdv
TS T^g cpqdaswg. Tovrcii di dno'/dXvxpiv ftiv swqa'/ivai, '/at yvco
aiv slXycpivat '/at nqocpyrsiav, ov/ avrsqiTi, 8tdXe'/rov fiivrot '/at
yXdaaav ni'/ d'/qt^wg 'EXXyvitovaav ainp ^Xinw, dXX' I8iwfiaaiv
re (laq^aqi'/olg yqdfievnv, xai nnv '/at aoXoi'/it,ovra. 'Aneq oi'/
dvayxalov vvv i'/Xiyeiv oidi ydq inia'/wnnov , firj ng vofiiay,
raiira etnov, aXXd fidvov rfjv avojioidryra dtsvdvvwv rovrwv Ttiiv
yqacpiov. " 21. Cyprian.
De bono patient. Pater Deus praecepit filium suum adorari
. . . et in Apocalypsi angelus Joanni volenti adorare se resistit
et dicit: "Vide ne feceris, quia conservus tuus sum, et fratrum
tuorum. Jesum Dominum adora." (Apoc. xix. 10.)
De eleemos. Audi in Apocalypsi Domini tui vocem, ejusraodi
homines justis objurgationibus increpantem: "Dicis," inquit, "di
ves sura, et ditatus sura, et nulhus rei egeo, et nescis quoniara
tu es miser, et miserabilis, et pauper, et coccus, et nudus es.
Suadeo tibi eraere a me aurum ignitum de igne, ut sis dives, et
vestera albara vestiaris, et non appareat in te foeditas nudi-
tatis tuae, et collyrio inunge oculos tuos ut videas. (Apoc. iii.
17, 18.)
Epist. 63. {Ad Caeeilium.) Aquas naraque populos significare,
in Apocalypsis scriptura divina declarat dicens: "Aquae quas vi
disti, super quas sedit meretrix ilia, populi, et turbae, et gentes

METHODIUS. VICTOEINUS PETAVIONENSIS. 351
ethnicorum sunt et linguae," quod scilicet perspicimus et in sa
cramento calicis contineri. (Apoc. xvii. 15.)
22. Methodius.*
Andr. proleg. in Apoc. (See before, under Papias, p. 339.)
Conviv. (p. 70.) "Oti de '/at dqytndqdsvng , ov rqdnov '/at
dqytnoifiyv '/at dqytnqncpfjryg yiyovsv b Xdyng ivavdqconyaag, rjjg
i'/'/Xyaiag, '/ai b yqiardXynrog yjilv naqiaryasv iv ^t^Xiit) Tryg
'AnoxaXvxpswg 'iwdvvyg, Xiywv Kat sidov, '/at Idov dqviov sary-
xog int TO 'dqog 2iwv . . . ovrot slatv ol fisrd yvvaixdv oi'/ ifio-
Xvvdyaav naqdivoi ydq slatv. Ovroi slaiv ol d'/nXovdovvrsg np
dqviij) onov dv vndyy. (Apoc. xiv. 1-14.)
23. Victorinus Petavionensis.*
De fabrica mundi. (Cave, Bist. Lit. Tom. I. p. 104.) Itaque
sine dubio autem diei angeh 12, noctis angeli 12, pro numeio
scilicet horarura; hi sunt namque 24 testes dierum et noctium,
qui sedent ante thronum Dei coronas aureas in capitibus suis
habentes; quos in Apocalypsi Joannis Apostoli et Evangelistae
seniores vocat, idcirco quia seniores sunt et aliis angelis et ho
minibus. (Apoc. iv. 4.)
In Apoeal. (In Lardner, Part. II. C. LVI.) Liber apertus
Apocalypsis est, quam Joannes vidit.
Ibid. Boc est, quoniara quando hoc vidit Joannes, erat in
insula Patraos, in metallura daranatus a Domitiano Caesare. Ibi
ergo vidit Apocalypsin. Et cum senior jam putaret se per pas
sionera accepturum receptionem, interfecto Domitiano, omnia ju
dicia ejus soluta sunt, et Joannes de metallo diraissus. Sic postea
tradidit hanc eandem quam acceperat a Domino Apocalypsin.
Hoc est, ''oportet te iterum prophetare."
* Methodius, Bishop of Olympus in Lycia, and afterwards of Tyre, wrote
against Porphyry, and (concerning the Eesurrection) against Origen, Eusebius
does not mention him — perhaps because be opposed Origen. Tho work quoted is
'Banquet of ten Virgins,' He is quoted by Andreas (see extract 1) as attesting the
inspiration of the book. It is probable, though not explicitly stated, that he
believed the writer to be John the Apostle, See Lardner, II, 107.
> Victorinus, Bishop of Pettau in Pannonia, who died a martyr under Dio
cletian in A.D, 303, His Commentary on the Apocalypse is the oldest now ex
tant. Its genuineness is not undisputed.

352 APOCALYPSE.
Jerome, De Vir. III. c. 74. Victorinus, Petavionensis episco
pus, non aequo Latine ut Graece novit. Unde opera ejus grandia
sensibus, viliora videntur compositione verborum. Sunt autem
haec: Commentarii in Genesin ... in Apocalypsin Joannis . . .
et raulta alia.
Cassiodor. Inst. Div. c. 5. De quo libro (Apocalypsi) et Vic
torinus saepe dictus episcopus difficilHraa quaedam loca tractavit.
24. Pamphilus.
Apol. pro Orig. (Opp. Orig. Tom. IV. Appendix p. 39.) Ait
Joannes in Revelatione sua: "Et reddidit raare raortuos quos ha
bebat in se, et raors et inferus reddiderunt mortuos suos qui
erant in eis." (Apoc. xx. 13.)
25. Lactantius.
Epit. c. 42. (p. 1276.) Bujus (sc. filii Dei) nomen nulh est
notum, nisi ipsi et Patri, sicut docet Joannes in Revelatione.
(Apoc. xix. 12.)
Instit. VII. 10. (p. 913.) Qui autem se vitiis ac sceleribus
contaminaverit, voluptatique servierit, is vero daranatus aeter-
nara luet poenara, quara divinae literae secundara raortera no-
minant, quae est et perpetua, et gravissimis cruciatibus plena.
(Apoc. ii. 11; xxi. 8.) 26. Eusebius.*
H. E. EI. 24. (See before, p. 90.)
Bnd. III. 25. (See before, p. 10.)
Ibid. III. 39. (See before, p. 55.)
Demonstr. Ev. 8 (p. 386 D.) "Odsv Idov, cpyatv, ivi/yasv
6 Xswv b ix CpvXfjg loida, xat avrdg yvoi^e rdg acpqayldag rag
' Eusebius is unable to pronounce a, decided opinion on the Apocalypse.
There is always something like si <pav£if) in his raind and in his expression. His
Anti-Millenarian views tended to raake him disinclined to admit the book on which
Millenarians founded their case ; while his real honesty made hira incapable of
letting such feelings rule his judgment. Impressed with the able arguments of
Dionysius, he swayed to and fro.

eusebius. athanasius. 353
inixetfiivag rip ^t^Xicjj, '/ard t^v 'AnoxdXvxpiv 'Iwdvvov. (Apoc.
V. 5.) H. E. III. 18. Ev rovrcp '/ariyst Xdyog rdv dndaroXov dfia
xat siayysXiaryv 'Icodvvyv sn rep ^iuj ivdiarqi^ovra , rqg elg rdv
delov Xdyov e'vexev fiaqrvqiag, Harfiov oh/elv '/aradt'/aadyvai T'qv
vyanv. Iqdcpwv yi TOt 6 Elqrjvalng neqt rfjg xpfjcpov T^g xard rdv
avriyqiarov nqoayyoqiag cpsqofiivyg iv rjj 'iwdvvov Xsyofiivy 'Ano
xaXvxpsi, avralg avXXa§alg sv nifinrcjj rdv nqdg rag alqiasig
ravra nsqi rnv Iwdvvnv cpyaiv ' "El de i'dst dvacpavddv iv rip vvv
'/aiqip '/yqvrrsadat rovvofia airov, dt' ixsivov 'dv E^qidrj rov xat
rfjv 'Ano'/dXvxpiv swqaxdrog. Oidi ydq nqd noXXofj yqdvov swq
ddy, aXXd aysddv int T^g fjfisriqag ysvsdg, nqdg rip riXst T^g
Jofiinavoi aqyfjg."
Ibid. IE. 29. 'Ent roirwv dfjia xat fj Xsyojii'vy twv Nt'/oXai-
rdv a'iqsaig int afir/qdrarov avviary yqdvov. Hg dy xat fj rov
'iwdvvov 'AnoxdXvxpig fivyfiovsvst. 27. Athanasius.
Canon of Athanas. (See before, p. 13.)
Synopsis ascribed to Athanas. (See before, p. 15.)
Contra Arianos Or. 1. Tom. I. p. 317. (Migne, Vol. II. p. 33.)
Oi8sfiia ydq riov dyiwv Fqacpcov roiovrov rt nsqt rov 2wryqog
s'iqyxsv, dXXd fidXXov dst rd atd tov, xat rd awslvat dst np Ha
rqi' 'Ev dqxjj ydq yv 6 Adyog, xat 6 Adyog yv nqdg rdv
Qedv, '/at Qedg yv 6 Adyog. Kat ev rfj 'Ano'/aXvxpet rdde
Xiyet, '0 cov, xat 6 yv, 6 iqydftsvog. (Apoc. i. 8.)
Ibid. Or. 2. Tom. I. p. 394. (Migne, Vol. II. p. 196.) "AyysXog
de diXovra nqoa'/vvfjaat rdv 'Iwdvvyv iv ry 'AnoxaXvxpst 'xwXvsi,
Xiywv bqa fiy' avvdovXdg aov slfit, '/at rdv ddsXcpdv aov rdv
nqocpyrdv, xat rdv ryqovvrwv rovg Xdyovg rov §t^Xiov roirov.
Tip Qecp nqoa'/vvyaov. (Apoc. xxii. 9.)
28. Cyril.
Canon of Cyril. (See before, p. 19.)
29. Epiphanius.
Canon of Epiph. (See before, p. 21.) 23

354 apocalypse.
Haeres. II. t. 1. h. 51. p. 423. {Concerriing fhe Alogi.) 'Enst
nvv rdv Adyov ov diyovrat rdv naqd 'Iwdvvov '/exyqvyfiivov, "AXo-
yot '/Xydyaovrai. AXXorqiot roivvv navrdnaatv vnaqyovreg rov
'/yqiyfiarog rfjg dXydeiag, dqvoivrat rd xad-aqdv rov '/yqiyfiarog,
xat ovre ro rnv Iwavvnv EvayysXiov diyovrat, ovrs rfjv avzoi
'Ano'/dXvxpiv. Kat sl fiiv idiyovro rd EiayyiXiov, rfjv 8i 'Ano
xdXvxpiv ans^dXXovro, iXiyofisv 'dv, jifj ny dqa xard d'/qi^oXoyiav
rovro notovvrai, dnd'/qvcpnv fiy dsydfisvot, did rd iv ry 'Ano-
'/aXixpst §adiwg '/at a'/orstviog slqyjiiva' bndrs di oi dixovrat
cpiast rd ^i^Xia rd dnd rov dyiov 'iwdvvov xsxyqvyfiiva, navrt
np dfjXov s'iy, on ovrot slat '/at ol ofioiot roiroig, nsqt dv sinsv
b dytog 'Iwdvvyg iv ralg xadoXt'/alg 'EniarnXalg' 'on "'Eaydry
wqa iart , xat rj'/oiaars 'on 'Avriyqiarog sqysrai ' xat vvv l8oi
'Avriyqtarot noXXot," x.r.X.
Ibid. II. t. 1. h. 51. p. 454. Odo'/ovat 8i xazd rfjg 'Anoxa-
Xixpscog rd8s yXsvdl^ovrsg ¦ Ti fis, cpqaiv, wcpsXsi y 'AnoxdXvxpig
'iwdvvov, Xiyovad fiot nsqt snrd dyysXwv, '/at snrd aaX7ciyycov,
OV'/ eidoTeg, ncijg dvayxaia '/at wcpiXifia roiavra vnyq^sv iv rfj
dqddryn roi '/yqiyfiarog. "Oaa ydq yv iv vdficp '/at iv nqncpfjzatg
a'/orstvd xat alviyfiarddy, ravra 6 Kvqtog cp'/ovdfiyas did rov
dy'iov Hvsvfiarog sig fjfiiov acoryqiav np doiXcp airov 'iwdvvy
dno'/aXixpat' rd i'/slas a'/orstvd, d8s elg nvevfiarixd '/at s'/8yXa
xyqvrrwv. ... p. 455. 2vvd8ovrog roivvv rov 'AnoardXov np dyicjj
'AnnarnXcj} 'Iwdvvy sv ry 'AnoxaXvxpet, noia Tig vnoXeinerat dv-
riXoyia; Hcog di oi'/ sidvg h/dary nXdvq iXsyydyasTat, rov Qsov
iv e/darcj) riov dyiwv dsdw/drog fiaqrvqiav; ... p. 456. Ovy bqdrs,
w ovrot, on nsqt rdv ywat'/dv Xiyst rcov iv olfjast nqocpyrsiag
dnarwfiivwv '/at dnarwacov noXXovg; cpyjit di nsqt HqiO'/iXXag,
'/at Ma^tfiiXXag , '/at KvivriXXag, cov oi XiXyds rd Hvsvfia to
dytov xat fj airwv dndry dXXd nqosdianias nqocpyqnxdg iv rep
ardfiart rov dyiov Iwdvvov, onsq iyivsro fisrd tijv toi; dyiov
'iwdvvov '/oifiqaiv. Airoi' di nqocprjzeiaavrog iv yqdvoig KXav-
diov Kaiaaqog dvcordrw, 'ore elg rfjv Hdrfinv vyaov vnfjq^ev (bfio-
Xoyoiai ydq '/at ovrot iv Qvareiqoig ravra nenXyqdadai), dqa
yovv '/ard nqocprjreiav 'syqacpe rolg ixei sv Xqiarcp '/ar' ixslvo
nenoXirevfiivotg, 'on yfieXXev eavrfjv yvvy nqocpfjziv xaXslv. Kat
8iinsaEv 6 xard T^g aXydsiag snsysiqdfisvog navrayddsv snsvs-
voy fisvog Xdyog, dstxvvjtivov tov '/ard rfjv 'AnoxdXvxpiv Xdyov

epiphanius. HILARY. JEEOME. 355
nqotpr/Tt'/oi ovrog, sx Hvsvfiarog dyinv '/ard dX'ydetav 'Enal-
qovrat di ndXiv rjj diavniq ol airoi Xs^idyqovvrsg dnsiqcog, iva
do'^wffi naqs'/^dXXsiv rd rofj dyiov 'AnoardXov fit^Xia, cpyfit di
Iwavvnv rd rs EvayyiXinv xat T'qv 'Ano'/dXvxpiv, rdya rs xat rdg
EntaroXdg' ^vvc^dnvat ydq '/at avrat rip EiayysXicij '/at rjj 'Ann-
xaXixpei. ... p. 457. 'AXXd oirnt, fifj dsydfisvot Hvsvfia dyinv,
ava'/qivovrai fiiv nvsvfiari'/dg, fiy voovvrsg rd rov Hvsvfiarog, '/at
'/ard rnv Xdyov ^nvXdfisvoi Xiysiv, xat oi'/ slddrsg rd iv rfj dyicx
Ex'/Xyaict 'yaqiofiara, drtva dXyddg '/at svaradarg iv naqaxoXov-
dyaei, xat i^^cofiivcj) vip, rd Hvsvfia rd dyiov diyyqaaro' o'i re
dyioi nqocpfjzat '/at ol dyioi 'AnoaroXoi ' iv otg '/at 6 dytog 'Iwdvvqg
did rov EiayyeXiov '/at Ttiiv 'EntaroXdv xat ryg 'Ano'/aXixpswg,
ex rov airov yaqiajiaTog rov dyiov fisza8i,8co'/s.
Ibid. (See before, p. 98, extract from Epiph. pp. 433, 434.)
Haeres. II. t. 2. h. 77. p. 1031. Kat 'on fiiv yiyqanrai nsqt
rfjg yiXiovraeryqiSog TaiSTjyg, oti ev ry AnoxaXvxpet Iiodvvnv, '/at
'on naqd nXeiarnig {iartv) fj /St/31og nsniarsvfiivy , '/at naqd
rnig dsoas^iai, dfjXov. 30. Hilary.*
In Psalm. 1. p. 226 E. (In Lardner, Part IL p. 412.) Quod
autem haec folia hgni hujus non inutiha sint, sed salutaria gen
tibus, sanctus Joannes in Apocalypsi testatur. (Apoc. xxii.)
De trinit. VI. p. 891 D. (In Lardner, ibid.) Electus ex pub
lica Matthaeus in apostolum, et ex familiaritate Domini revela
tione coelestium mysteriorum dignus Joannes.
31. Jerome.
Epist. II. ad Paulin. (See before, p. 21.)
De Vir. Bl. c. 9. (See before, p. 187.)
Ep. 129. ad Dardan. (Vallars. Vol. I. p. 965.) Quod si eam
(sc. Epist. ad Hebraeos) Latinorum consuetudo non recipit inter
Scripturas canonicas, nec Graecorum quidera Ecclesiae Apoca
lypsin Joannis eadem libertate suscipiunt; et tamen nos utraque
• Hilary Bishop of Poitiers about a.d. 354, 23*

356 APOCALYPSE.
suscipimus, nequaquam hujus temporis consuetudinera, sed vete
rum scriptorum auctoritatem sequentes, qui pleruraque utriusque
abutuntur testimoniis, non, ut interdum de Apocryphis facere
solent, . . . sed quasi Canonicis et Ecclesiasticis.
Adv. Jovinianum I. 26. (Vallars. Vol. II. p. 279.) Joannes,
et Apostolus, et Evangelista, et Propheta. Apostolus, quia scripsit
ad ecclesias ut magister : Evangelista, quia librum Evangelii con
didit, . . . Propheta, vidit enira in Patraos insula, in qua fuerat
a Doraitiano principe ob Doraini martyrium relegatus, Apoca
lypsim infinita futurorum raysteria continentem.
In Isaiam Lib. XVIII. Prooem. (Vallars. Vol. IV. p. 767.)
Et qua ratione intelligenda sit Apocalypsis Joannis, quam si juxta
literam accipimus, judaizandum est, si spiritualiter, ut scripta est,
disseriraus, raultorura veterum videbimur opinionibus contraire: La
tinorum, Tertulhani, Victorini, Lactantii: Graecorum, ut caeteros
praetermittam, Irenaei, tantum Lugdunensis episcopi faciara raen-
tionem, adversus quera vir eloquentissiraus Dionysius, Alexandri
nae Ecclesiae Pontifex, elegantem scribit librum, irridens mille
annorura fabulam, et auream atque gemmatam in terris Jerusa
lem, instaurationera Templi, hostiarum sanguinem, otiura sab-
bathi, circumcisionis injuriam, nuptias, partus, liberorum educa-
tionem, epularura delicias, et cunctarum gentium servitutem: rur
susque bella, exercitus ac triumphos, et superatorum neces, mor-
temque centenarii peccatoris. Cui duobus volurainibus respondit
Apollinarius, quera non solum suae sectae homines, sed et nos
trorum in hac parte duntaxat plurima sequitur multitudo, ut
praesaga mente jara cernam, quantorum in me rabies concitanda
sit.

357

NOTE ON CHAPTER XXXIV.
The copious extracts in this chapter show that the Apocalypse has had a
varied measure of acceptance. At first, while men still expected an early return
of Jesus Christ, the book seems to have been widely popular. This popularity
lasted to the end of the second century. Hermas imitated it; Papias quoted it
as inspired and trustworthy; Justin has from it his only citation of a New Testa
ment book by name. And it appears that he not only quoted but expounded it,
as also did Irenaeus. On the other side we must note its absence from the
Peshito. The Alogi (see below — Heretics), who opposed all the Johannine writ
ings, objected to this book, as to the others.
In the third century, although Origen and Hippolytus ascribed it to the
Apostle John, opposition grew formidable, Caius, a "Eoman Presbyter," about
whom little is certainly known, ascribed an apocalyptic book to Cerinthus ; and
his reference is perplexing, as he apparently found in the book a description of
a very carnal reign of the Saints in Jerusalem, On this account Hug aud others
have denied that his reference is to the Johannine Apocalypse, But no other
book is known to wbich the reference can apply ; and besides, it is just such
an exaggerated description as would originate in keen controversy. In the latter
part of the century Dionysius of Alexandria, the pupil and successor of Origen,
prepared a formidable indictment to which all subsequent objectors have recourse
for arguments. The headings of paragraphs in our text give a summary of his
argument. There is good reason to believe that iu the case of Dionysius, as
certainly in that of Eusebius, it was dislike of millenarian views which led to
depreciation of the Apocalypse.
Prom the days of Jerome, who accepted the Apocalypse as the work of the
Apostle John, and expressly based his opinion on the testimonies of the ancients,
there was little controversy regarding it in the Western Church until the Ee
formation. In the Eastern Church — from the rejection by Cyril of Jerusalem
A,D. 386 — there was considerable discussion ; some doubting the canonicity of
the book, some doubting that it was by John the son of Zebedee,
At the Eeforraation, Erasmus expressed his doubts of the authorship ; Zwing-
lius rejected the book; Luther cast it off with contumely; Calvin used it, but
did not comment upon it. At that time the chief controversy in Europe was
upon the central doctrine of Justification, and the Apocalypse did not occupy a
prominent position. But at a later date, when the controversy became ecclesias
tical rather than doctrinal, each side, Protestant and Eoman Catholic, interpreted
it as a prophecy of the downfall of the other ; and it was universally accepted
as canonical, Bossuet and Vitringa are leading representatives of the two divi
sions of Western Christendom, Bengel's system of interpretation has been much
followed.

358 APOCALYPSE.
During the 19th century there has been a keen controversy both as to the
canonicity and as to the authorship of the book. Here, again, theological con
victions have had no little share in deciding the side taken by critics. Its ge
nuineness is maintained, and — if we may use the word — its canonicity, by those
who are usually found as opponents of such claims. Those who ascribe a late
date to the Gospels — especially to the Fourth Gospel — generally give the Apo
calypse an early date, and claim the Apostle as its author, using its language
and style as an argument against the idea of the Gospel being written by the
same Apostle, In this way the views of the Tiibingen school as to the first form
of Jewish Christianity lead them to uphold the canonicity of this book, though
denying to almost all the rest of the New Testament an Apostolic origin.
But even apart frora questions of canonicity there is great division of opi
nion as to the authorship. The scraps of Papias have been as fruitful of works
upon the two Johns as in works upon the original of Matthew's Gospel, or upon
the "order" of Mark. Dionysius, though in a very diffident manner (see p. 349),
took refuge in the supposition that Presbyter John was the author. But against
this Irenaeus is decided. Moreover, if Irenaeus (p. 54 &c,) and Arethas (p. 338)
be right, Papias, as a "hearer of John," is an ultimate authority, and Papias's
testimony seems to be distinct; so that the authorship by the son of Zebedee is
established. But the argument on the other side is that Irenaeus or Papias, or
both, must have been mistaken. (See on "Aretas" Prof W, P. Dickson's ar
ticle in Smith's Diet, of Christian Biography,) For Presbyter John as the author
we have Credner, Bleek, Ewald, De Wette, Lucke (ultimately), DUsterdieck and
Keim, For the Apostle John, Eichhorn, Ebrard, Hengstenberg, Hofmann, Geb
hardt and Krenkel, For John Mark, Hitzig and Weisse.

PART II.
TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.

361

n.
TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.^

1. Tacitus (a.d. 61 to about a.d. 120).
Ann. XV. 44. Sed non ope humana, non largitionibus prin
cipis aut deum placamentis decedebat infamia quin jussum in-
cendium crederetur. Ergo abolendo ruraori Nero subdidit reos
et quaesitissimis poenis affecit, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus
Christianos appellabat. Auctor norainis ejus Christus Tiberio im-
peritante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supphcio affectus
erat; repressaque in praesens exitiabilis superstitio rursum erum-
pebat, non raodo per Judaeara, originera ejus mali, sed per Ur
bera etiara, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt
celebranturque. Igitur primum correpti qui fatebantur, deinde
indicio eorum multitudo ingens haud perinde in criraine incendii
quam odio humani generis convicti sunt. Et pereuntibus ad
dita ludibria, ut ferarum tergis contecti laniatu canum inter-
irent aut crucibus affixi, aut flammandi, atque ubi defecisset
dies, in usum nocturni luminis urerentur. Bortos suos ei spec
taculo Nero obtulerat et circense ludicrum edebat, habitu aurigae
permixtus plebi vel curriculo insistens. Unde quamquara adversus
sontes et novissiraa exempla meritos raiseratio oriebatur, tan
quara non utilitate publica sed in saevitiam unius absumerentur.
' The earliest testimonies quoted in the text do not refer directly to the
books; but they show what was the condition of the Christian Church and how
largely it bulked in the eye of a Pagan observer. The testimonies of the heathen
writers must be taken in connection with the writings of the Christian Apolo
gists, to throw light upon the state of the churches whose bond of cohesion was
the faith embodied in the Christian books.

362 testimonies of heathen.
2. Martial (a.d. 60 to a.d. 100).
Lib. X. Epigr. 25:—
In matutina nuper spectatus arena
Mucins, imposuit qui sua membra focis,
Si patiens fortisque tibi durusque videtur,
Abderitanae pectora plebis habes.
Nam, cum dicatur, tunica praesente raolesta
Ure manum, plus est dicere: Non facio.^
3. Pliny's Letter asking Directions from Trajan.
C. PLINTUS TEAJANO IMPEBATOEl'^ (a.D. 111).
Solemne est mihi, domine, omnia de quibus dubito ad te re
ferre, quis enim potest melius vel cunctationera raeara regere vel
ignorantiam instruere? Cognitionibus de Christianis interfui num-
quam : ideo nescio quid et quatenus aut puniri soleat aut quaeri,
nec raediocriter haesitavi, sitne aliquod discrimen aetatum, an
quamlibet teneri nihil a robustioribus differant, detur paenitentiae
venia, an ei qui omnino Christianus fuit desisse non prosit, no
raen ipsura, si flagitiis careat, an flagitia cohaerentia nomini pu
niantur. Interim in iis qui ad me tamquam Christiani defere-
bantur hunc sum secutus modum. Interrogavi ipsos an essent
Christiani: confitentes iterum ac tertio interrogavi supplicium
minatus: perse veran tes duci jussi. Neque enim dubitabam, quale-
curaque esset quod faterentur, pertinaciara certe et inflexibilera
• Martial. Juvenal also, Sat. VIII. 235, says: •' Ausi qiwd liceat tunied punire
molests," (see also Sat, I, 155), And Seneca, in his list of cruelties, mentions the
blazing coat last, '¦'¦ illam tunicam, cJAmemJtis ignium ei iUitam et intextam" (Ep. 14),
apparently as a climax. The words of Martial may be Supposed to describe the
hardihood of Christians as greater than that of Mueius,
> Pliny's Letters. Edition-Keil, Leipzic, 1870, p. 307, The chief value, for
our purpose, of this letter and of tbe Emperor's reply is, to show how Asia was
pervaded by Christiaijity, a few years after the death of the Apostle John, Pli
ny's language shows that the Pagan temples were deserted. If John survived in
Ephesus till Trajan's reign began, there must have been in his last years a large
Christian Church in the regions around him. The difficulty of forging a Gospel
in his name, so as to get it accepted by all that Church, when for the first time
published many years after his death, is enormous. See Introduction : " The
Fourth Gospel. " See on the nuraber of copies of the Gospels circulated araong
Christians : Norton's Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. I, p. 28 (2i* Edition),

PLINY'S LETTER. 363
obstinationem debere puniri. Fuerunt alii similis araentiae, quos,
quia cives Roraani erant, adnotavi in urbera reraittendos. Mox
ipso tractatu, ut fieri solet, diffundente se crimine plures species
inciderunt. Propositus est libellus sine auctore raultorura noraina
continens. Qui negabant esse se Christianos aut fuisse, , cura
praeeunte me deos appellarent et iraagini tuae, quara propter
hoc jusserara cum siraulacris numinum adferri, ture ac vino sup-
plicarent, praeterea male dicerent Christo, quorum nihil posse
cogi dicuntur qui sunt re vera Christiani, dimittendos esse pu-
tavi. Alii ab indice norainati esse se Christianos dixerunt et mox
negaverunt; fuisse quidem,^sed desisse, quidam ante triennium,
quidam ante plures annos, non nemo etiara ante viginti. Bi quo
que omnes et iraaginera tuam deorumque simulacra venerati sunt
et Christo male dixerunt. Adfirraabant autera hanc fuisse sura
raam vel culpae suae vel erroris, quod essent soliti state die
ante lucem convenire carraenque Christo quasi deo dicere secura
invicem seque sacramento non in scelus aliquod obstringere, sed
ne furta, ne latrocinia, ne adulteria comraitterent, ne fidera fal-
lerent, ne depositum appellati abnegarent: quibus peractis morera
sibi discedendi fuisse, rursusque coeundi ad capiendura cibura,
promiscuum tamen et innoxium; quod ipsum facere desisse post
edictum raeura, quo secundum mandata tua hetaerias esse ve-
tuerara. Quo raagis necessariura credidi ex duabus ancillis, quae
rainistrae dicebantur, quid esset veri et per tormenta quaerere.
Nihil aliud inveni quam superstitionem pravara iraraodicara. Ideo
dilata cognitione ad consulendura te decucurri. Visa est enim
mihi res digna consultatione, maxirae propter perichtantiura nu
merum. Multi enira omnis aetatis, oranis ordinis, utriusque sexus
etiam, vocantur in periculum et vocabuntur. Neque civitates tan
tum sed vices etiara atque agros superstitionis istius contagio
pervagata est; quae videtur sisti et corrigi posse. Certe satis
constat prope jara desolata terapla coepisse celebrari et sacra
sollerania diu intermissa repeti pastumque jvenire victimarura,
cujus adhuc rarissiraus emptor inveniebatur. Ex quo facile est
opinari, quae turba horainura emendari possit, si sit poenitentiae
locus.

364 TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN,

4. The Emperor's Reply to Pliny.
TEAJANUS PLnsao.
Actum quem debuisti, mi Secunde, in excutiendis causis eorum
qui Christiani ad te delati fuerant secutus es. Neque enira in
universura aliquid quod quasi certara formam habeat constitui
potest. Conquirendi non sunt: si deferantur et arguantur, pu-
niendi sunt, ita tamen ut qui negaverit se Christianum esse id-
que re ipsa manifestum fecerit, id est supplicando dis nostris,
quamvis suspectus in praeteritum, veniam ex paenitentia impe-
tret. Sine auctore vero propositi libelli in nullo criraine locum
habere debent. Nam et pessirai exempli nec nostri saeculi est^
5. Suetonius* (a.d. 121).
Vit. Claud, c. 25. [Sc. Claudius] Judaeos, impulsore Chresto,
assidue tumultuantes Eoma expulit. (Acts xvhi. 2; Rom. xvi.)
Nero c. 16. Afflicti suppliciis Christiani, genus hominum su
perstitionis novae et maleficae. (2 Tim. i. 8, 16; ii. 16-18.)
6. Hadrianus Minucio Fundano, about a.d. 130*.
Accepi Iitteras ad me scriptas a decessore tuo Sereno Gra-
niano, clarissimo viro: et non placet mihi relationem silentio
* Trajan's rescript raeans that, while Christians were not to be sought for,
they were to be punished, simply because they were Christians, when accused
and convicted of that crime. They might escape by recanting and sacrificing to
Roman idols. The same principle regulates the answer of Marcus Aurelius (a.d.
177) to the inquiry of the Governor of Lyons, if we are to trust the narrative
preserved by Eusebius H. E. V. 1.
' Suetonius (who testifies in these passages to the banishment of Christians
by Claudius, and to their persecution by Nero) elsewhere shows how great were
the calamities which fell upon the people of Jerusalem in the reigns of Vespasian
and Titus. See Sueton. Vespas. c. 4-8 ; Sueton. cc. 4, 5. In his life of Domi
tian, u, 12, he speaks of some Jews who sought to evade payraent of the Jewish
tax on the ground of not being Jews ; and in this he probably refers to the
Christians. See Lardner, Vol, III, p, 618, &c.
• For the Latin Text — of Rufinus — see Otto's Justin I, c, 68, and Proleg,
p, XXXII, It appears as though Serenus Granianus (but his real name was
Quintus Licinius Silvanus Granianus) had written to the Emperor shortly before
leaving his office, so that Hadrian's reply was sent to his successor. That this
rescript is genuine was doubted by Keim (1866), and his negative position has

HADEIANCS MINUCIO FUNDANO. 365
praeterire, ne et innoxii perturbentur et calumniatoribus latro-
cinandi tribuatur occasio. Itaque si evidenter provinciales huic
petitioni suae adesse valent adversum Christianos, ut pro tribu-
nali eos in aliquo arguant, hoc eis exequi non prohibeo: preci-
bus autem in hoc solis et adclamationibus uti eis non permitto.
Etenim multo aequius est, si quis volet accusare, te cognoscere
de objectis. Si quis igitur accusat et probat adversum leges
quicquam agere memoratos horaines, pro raerito peccatorum etiam
supplicia statues. Illud mehercule magnopere curabis, ut si quis
calumniae gratia quemquam horum postulaverit reum, in hunc
pro sui nequitia suppliciis severioribus vindices.
[The following is Eusebius's Greek version of the Imperial
letter, frora his Bist. Eccl. IV. 9.]
Mivovxicp 0ovv8avip. 'EniaroXyv i8s^dfiyv yqacpsladv jiot
dnd 2sqsvvinv Fqaviavoi, Xafinqordrov dvdqdg, 'dvnva ai die-
di^w. Ov doxel fioi ovv rd nqdyfia dt,fjzrjzov '/araXinelv, iva
fi'qre ol dvdqwnot raqdTrwvrai, xat rolg av/ocpdvratg yoqyyia xa-
xovqyiag naqaayedfj. El ovv aacpdg elg tku't?;}' rfjv d^iwaiv ol
snaqyidrat dvvavrat 8iiaxvqi'C,eadai '/ard rdv Xqiariavcov , dg
been adopted by Baur (Ch. Hist, Part V), Hilgenf (Einl. p, 169), Overbeck
(Sjudien zur Geschichte der Alten Kirche, 1875), Aub^ (Les Persecutions de
rEglise, 1B75) and others. Keim also (1878) returned to the charge in his "Aus
dem Urchristenthum" p, 181, See defences in Wieseler's '^'Die Christenver
folgungen der Caesaren" 1878 (p, 18), and in Eenan's "L'Eglise chretienne"
1879 (p, 32), Eusebius says that Serenus Granianus had written that it seemed
to him unjust that Christians should be put to death because of popular clamour,
and without legal trial and conviction of crime; and that Hadrian's reply was
to the effect that no man should be put to death without a formal trial and
conviction. His text bears out his sumraary. But the question is whether this
is consistent with history. Or to put it somewhat differently : Was it still enough
to prove that » man was si Christian, or must a definite crime be proved against
him? Those who doubt the letters ascribed to Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and
Marcus Aurelius (for whose long and obviously forged "Letter to The Senate"
see Otto's Justin p. 246), all of them increasingly favourable to Christians, be
lieve that Trajan's edict in his letter to Pliny was still in force. Their strong
point is that Justin's Apology and the stories of the Martyrs shew that Christians
— simply as such — were in danger of death. If those merciful provisions in the
disputed Imperial edicts had existed. Christians would not have needed to make
their constant deraand to be tried for crimes and not merely on account of their
creed, Marcus Aurelius in his letter respecting the Christians in Gaul (Eus, II,
E, V, 1, 42) substantially repeats Trajan's instructions. If that account in Euse
bius state correctly what the Emperor said, it is inconceivable that the Antonines
wrote the almost Christian letters ascribed to thera. But Hadrian's letter may
still be genuine, inasmuch as it only stipulates for explicit accusation, and does
not define what would be conduct "against the laws,"

366 TESTIMONIES OP HEATHEN.
'/at nqd ^-qftarog dnoxqivaadai, inl rovro fidvov rqandaiv, dXX'
ovx a^idasatv, oi8i fidvaig §oalg. UoXXep ydq fidXXov nqoafj/sv,
st Ttg '/aryyoqslv ^ovXotro, roird as 8taytvwaxstv. E't Tig ovv
'/aryynqel '/at 8ei'/vvaL n naqd rnvg vdfiovg nqdrrovrag, ovrcog
bqi^e xard rfjv 8vvafiiv rnv dfiaqr'rjfiarng' wg fid rdv 'HqaxXia
e'l Tig av'/ocpavriag ydqtv rovro nqoreivoi, 8taXdfi§ave vniq rfjg
8eivoTyrog, '/at cpqdvri^e onwg dv i'/dr/'yaeiag.

7. Letter of Hadrian to Servianus.*
FIA VII VOPISCI STRACITSn " SATUENINTJS. " A.D. 129.
C. II. 2 Badrianus Augustus Serviano Consuli Salutera.
Aegyptura, quam mihi laudabas, Serviane carissime, totam didici
levem pendulam et ad orania famae momenta volitantem. Illic
qui Serapera colunt Christiani sunt et devoti sunt Serapi qui
se Christi Episcopos dicunt. Nemo illic Archisynagogus Judaeo
rura, nemo Samarites, nerao Christianorum Presbyter, non ma-
theraaticus, non haruspex, non aliptes. Ipse ille Patriarcha cum
Aegyptura venerit, ab aliis Serapidera adorare, ab aliis cogitur
Christum. Genus horainura seditiosissiraum vanissimum injurio-
sissiraura: civitas opulenta dives fecunda, in qua nemo vivat otio-
sus. Alii vitrum conflant, ab aliis charta conficitur : alii linifiones,
oranes certe cujuscumque artis et videntur et habentur. Podagrosi
quod agant habent; habent caeci quod faciant. Ne chiragrici
quidem apud eos otiosi vivunt. Unus illis D(3us nullus [al. nura-
raus] est. Bunc Christiani, hunc Judaei, hunc jomnes venerantur
et gentes. Et utinam melius esset morata civitas, digna profecto
quae pro sui profunditate, quae pro sui magnitudine totius Aegypti
teneat principatum. &c.
» Servianus or Severianus, Hadrian's brother-in-law, was consul a.d. 129, the
year that Antinous was drowned. It is supposed that Hadrian was angry because
the Christians would not worship his favourite. The letter is preserved by Fla
vins Vopiscus in his life of Saturninus (about a.d. 300),
^ Scriptores Historiae Augustae ab Hadriano ad Numerianum. Beroliui,
1863,

ANTONINUS'S EPISTLE. 367
8. AvTuvi'vou ETriaToXY] Tupo; to Kowov t'tj; 'Acta?.*
(a.d. 148?)
Avro'/qdrwq Kalaaq Tirog A'iXtng 'Adqiavdg 'Avrwvlvng .Se/?-
aardg Eias^fjg, Aqyisqsvg Miytarog, dyjiaqyi'/yg i^ovaiag rd '/a',
vnarng rd d', Haryq Harqidog, rip Koivcp ryg Aaiag yaiqsiv.
Eyw cpfirjv on xat rovg dsovg intfisXslg sasadai jifj Xavddvsiv
rovg roiovrovg. HoXv ydq fidXXov i'/sivovg '/oXdaoisv, smsq dv-
vaivro, rnvg fifj povXofiivovg avroig nqnO'/vvslv. Oig zaqayfjv
Vfislg ifi§dXXsTE, '/airyv yvcofiqv aircdv, fjvnsq I'yovatv, dg ddiwv
xaryyoqslrs, '/at 'srsqd nva ifi^dXXsrs, drtva oi 8vvdfieda dnn-
8el^ai. E'iy 8' dv i'/eivnig yq'qaifiov rd doxelv int rip '/aryyoq-
ovfiivcp rsdvdvai ' v.at vixdaiv vfidg nqniifisvnt rdg savrdv xpv
ydg, 'ijnsq nsiddfisvnt oig d§iovrs nqdaasiv avrovg. Hsqt di rdv
asiofidv TW*" ysyovdzwv -/at rdv yiyvofiivwv oi'/ sl'/dg vnofivyaat
Vfidg ddvfinvvTag, nravnsq dat, naqa^dXXovrag rd vfiirsqa nqdg
rd i'/sivcov, 'on svna^qyaiaardrsqot vfidv yivovrat nqdg rdv dedv.
Kat Vftelg fiiv ayvoelv do'/slrs naq i'/eivov rdv yqdvov rovg
d-eovg, xat rdv leqdv dfieXelre, dqqa'/eiav di rfjv neqt rdv dedv
oi'/ iniaraade. "Odev xat roig dqya'/eiovrag iCyXw'/are, '/at
diw'/ere scog davarov. 'Yniq nov rotnvrwv '/mI dXXni nvig tw)'
neqt rdg inaqxiag yye fidvwv rep d-etnrdnji fiov narqt syqaxpav
oig '/at dvriyqaxpe fiydiv oyXelv rolg roiairoig, sl fiy cpaivoivrd
Ti inl rfjv yysfioviav 'Pwfiaiwv iyyeiqoivreg. Kat ifiot 8s neqt
rdv Toinircov noXXoi iayfiavav nig 8y xat dvriyqaxpa, ry rnv
narqdg fiov '/ara'/oXovddiv yvcofiy. El di Tig s'ysi nqng nva rdiv
roiovrwv nqdyfia '/aracpiqstv cog roiovrov, i'/slvog b '/aracpsqd-
fisvng dnoXeXiadw rov iy/Xy ftarog , '/dv cpaivrjzat roiovrog wv,
i'/slvog di b '/aracpiqcov 'svoyog sarat rrj 8Lxy.
' This letter is preserved at the end of Justin's second Apology, but pro
bably not by Justin himself. Compare the text in Eus. H. E. IV. 13, and
especially the superscription which professes to be from Marcus Aurelius. This
inconsistency in the authorities is one of many grounds for doubting the whole
production. Our text is from Otto's Justin, I. p. 244. Antoninus Pius did write
in favour of Christians to various cities, if Melito is to be trusted. See Melito in
Eus. H. E, IV, 26,

368 testimonies of heathen.
9. Lucian (a.d. 176).*
De Morte Peregrini, c. 11. "OrsnEq xat t^i/ davfiaarfjv ao
cpiav rcov Xqianaviov s^ifiads nsqt T'qv HaXaiarlvyv rolg Isqevat
'/at yqafifiarevaiv airdv ^vyyevdfievog. Kat ri ydq ; iv §qayel
naldag avroig anicpyve ' nqocpyryg '/at diaadqyjqg '/at ^vvaywyevg
'/at ndvra fidvog aizdg wv '/at zdv ^i^Xwv rdg fiiv i^yyslro
'/at disaacpsi, noXXdg 8s avrdg xat ^wiyqacps, '/at c5g dsdv avrdv
ixslvot fjyoivro xat vofiodiry iyqcUvrn '/at nqoardryv iniyqacpov
rdv fisyav yovv s'/slvov 'dn ai^ovai rdv dvdqwnov rdv sv rfj
HaXatarivy avaaxoXoniadivra , on '/atvfjv ravryv rsXsryv slay-
yayev ig rdv ^iov.
Tore dfj /at avXXycpdetg int roircj b Hqwrevg ivineaev elg
TO dea jicoTyqiov , oneq '/at avrd ov fit'/qdv avrip a^iwfta neqi-
enolyae nqdg rdv s^fjg ^iov '/at r-qv rsqarsiav xat do^o'/oniav
wv iqdv srvyyavsv. 'Enst 8' ovv eJetJcTO, ol Xqianavot avfi-
cpoqdv noLoifisvoL rd nqdyfia ndvra i'/ivovv i^aqndaai nstqw-
fisvot avrov. Eir inst rovro fjv advvarov, rj ys dXXy deqaneia
ndaa oi naqiqywg, dXXd avv anovdfj iyiyvsro' '/at swdsv ftiv
sidvg yv bqdv naqd np deajiwryqii^ neqifiivovra yqc^8ia yfjqag
nvdg xal naiSia dqcpavd, ol 8i iv riXet airwv '/at avve'/ddev8ov
sv8ov fisr' airoi 8tacpdsiqovrsg roig dsafincpiXa'/ag' sira Sslnva
nntxiXa slas'/nfii^srn xat Xdyoi Isqot iXiyovro '/at b ^iXnarog
Heqeyqlvog — en ydq roiro i'/aXelro — '/aivdg 2co'/qdryg vn av
nov wvofid^ero. Kat fiyv '/d'/ rdv iv 'Aaicc ndXswv iartv dv
fj'/dv nvsg, Twr Xqiariavcov arsXXdvrwv dnd roi '/oivov, fioydy-
aovrsg "/at ^vvayoqsiaovrsg '/at naqafivd-yadfisvoi rdv dvdqa.
'Afifjyavov di n rd rdyog Enidsixvvvrai , insL8dv n roiovrov
yivrjzat dyfidatov ' sv ^qaysl ydq, dcpsidovat ndvrwv. Kat dq xat
Tip Hsqsyqivij) noXXd rdrs fj/e yqyjiara an' airdv int nqocpdaet
rdv dea fidv '/at nqdaodov oi fw/qdv rairyv inotrjaaro' nenei-
xaai ydq avrovg ol xaxodaifioveg rd ftiv 'dXov dddvarot eaeadat

' Lucian, a native of Samosata in Syria, born under Hadrian, flourished
under the two Antonines. He had an official post in Egypt. He wrote regarding
Peregrinus, who burnt himself after the Olympic Games, a.d. 165. The passage
quoted in the text is intended to ridicule the Christians, and is specially parallel
with Ignatius : see Zahn's ' Ignatius,' p. 327, For many curious passages in support
of a theory that this and many other works were forged a few hundred years
ago, see Cotterill's 'Peregrinus Proteus' (Edin, 1879).

CELSUS. 369
xat §iwasadat rdv del yqovov, naq' o xat '/aracpqovovai rov
davdrov xat sxdvrsg avrovg sntdtdnaaiv nl noXXoi' sneira di b
vofindirqg n nqdrog I'nstasv airovg dg ddeXcpol ndvrsg slsv dX-
XfjXwv, insiddv dna^ naqa^dvrsg dsnvg fiiv roig 'EXXrjvi'/ovg
dnaqvqaovrai , rdv di avsa'/oXoniafiivov ixsivov aocpiarfjv airdv
nqoO'/vvdai '/at xard rovg i'/sivov vdfiovg §idai. Karacpqovnvatv
oiv dndvrwv i^ layg '/at '/oivd fjyovvrai dvsv nvdg d'/qi^ovg
niarewg rd rnidvza naqade^djievoi. 'Iiv roivvv naqiXdy ztg elg
aizovg ydyg '/at reyviryg avdqconog '/at nqdyjiaai yqfjadai dv
vdfievng, avri'/a fidXa nXoiaiog iv §qaysl iyivsro Idiwraig dv
dqconoig iyyavdv.
10. Celsus.*
I. celsus's book, the title akd method.
Origen c. Celsum, I. 40. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 733.) 'E^fjg di rov
roig dnd red xard Mardalov, rdya 8i '/at rdv Xntndv Eiayys-
' Celsus wrote a book entitled Xoyo? aXTiSnj?, which appears to have been
an able assault upon Christianity from a philosophical and historical point of view.
From various indications in the book, especially from the references to the state
of the heathen world and to the persecution of Christians, the date may be flxed
at about a.d. 178. Celsus refers to the Gospel narrative so fully and so fre
quently, that it is only necessary to give in our text some specimens of his mode
of proceeding, and an indication of his acquaintance with each of the four ca
nonical Gospels. He used Matthew — and Matthew in its present form (on this
see Keim's Celsus, p, 228) — as his chief authority, but he knew the others, and
quoted each of them. There are beyond question references to John. The in
cidents noticed by Celsus are (with at most one or two exceptions) from our
Gospels, He refers to the Sibyl, saying that her writings are used and inter
polated by Christians (V. 61; VII, 53); to the mystic symbols of the Ophites
(VI. 25); and to Gnostic sects and writings (V. 54; V. 62; VIII. 15), He does
not refer to any Christian writer of note, nor to any extra-canonical Christian
work (unless we regard Enoch (V, 54) and the Dialogue of Papiscus and Jason
(IV, 52) as exceptions). His references to the Epistles, though clear, are few.
He seems to have set himself to study Christianity at its source; and he con
structed an elaborate, keen, and able polemical treatise, anticipating most of the
objections to the Gospels which are to be found iu writers even of our own day.
His analysis of the accounts of the Resurrection, and his criticism of the Dis
courses of Jesus, may be cited as examples of his acuteness. His inability to ap
preciate, or even to understand, the moral beauty of the life of Jesus Christ,
shows how much lower was his own moral than his intellectual tone, Origen
says that he was an Epicurean: he seems to have been a friend of Lucian; and,
like his friend, he opposed Christianity in a hard way.
The work of Celsus has been compiled in Greek from Origen by C. E. Jach-
mann (1836), and Keim (1873) collected the passages and translated them into
German with copious dissertations on the age and philosophy of the author.
Lardner's Analysis is more intelligible, though less extended, than Keim's,
24

370 TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.
Xicov, Xa§wv rd neqt T^g sntnrdayg rip ^wrrjqt ^annl^ofiivc^
naqd rov 'iwdvvov nsqiarsqdg, 8ia§dXXsLv ^ovXerai wg nXdofia
rd elqrjfiivov. .Jiaavqag 8i, wg ^ero, rfjv nsqt tov ex naqdivov
ysyEvvfjadai rdv 2wryqa fjjidv laroqiav, oi rd s^fjg rfj rd^ei ex-
riderat' inet jiydiv eyet rerayjiivov dvfidg xat i'ydqa. 'AXXd
'/ard rd snsXddv ol dqyi^dftsvoi '/at ol sydqafCovrsg xaxyyoqoiatv
ovg fiiaovai, fifj inirqsndfisvoi dnd rov nddovg rsdswqyfisvwg
xat '/ard rd^tv Xiyetv rdg xaryyoq'iag. El fiiv ydq tij)/ rd^iv
ET'yqst, Xa^dv dv rd EiayyiXiov, '/at xaryyoqslv airov nqodifie-
vog, T^g nqdrqg dv laroqiag xareinwv, s^fjg int rfjv devriqav
naqeyivero, '/at ovrwg snt rdg Xoindg. Nvvi ds, jierd rfjv sx
naqdsvov yivvyaiv, b ndvr' sldivai snayystXdfievog KiXaog rd
yfiirsqa, xaryyoqsl rov naqd np ^anriafiart cpavivrog 'Ayiov
Hvsvfiarog iv sidst nsqiarsqdg' sira fisrd roiro dia^dXXsi rd
nqocprjzsvsadat Tiyv roi Acoryqog fjfidv inidqfiiav '/at fisrd ravra
dvarqixst int rd s^yg rjj yeviaet roi lyaov avayeyqajifiivov, rd
neqt rov dariqog diyyyjia, xat rcov iXyXvddrwv dnd dvaroXyg
fidywv nqoa'/vvfjaat np natdico. HoXXd 8 dv '/at ai'rdg snt-
ryqdv svqyg avyxsyvfisvwg rip KsXaqi siqyfiiva 8i' oXyg rfjg /St-
^Xov' 'iva '/at 8td roirov vnd rdv rd^tv intarafiivwv ryqslv xat
Cyrslv, iXeyydy fierd noXXfjg dqaairyrog xat dXa'Qoveiag snt-
yqdxpag 'AXyd-y Adyov rfjv §l^Xov avrov, onsq Twr sXXoyifiwv
cpiXoadcpwv oidstg inoiyasv. 'O fiiv ydq HXdrcov cpyatv, oi '/ard
rdv vovv syovra sivai rd diiayvqi^eadai neqt Twr Totdv8e '/at
d8yXoriqwv b 8s Xqiainnog noXXayov i'/difisvog rd xivfjaavra
avrdv, dvanifinet fjfidg icp ovg av evqotfiev xqelrrov airov iqovv-
rag. Ovrog ovv b xat rovrwv '/at rdv Xotndv 'EXXyvwv aocpw-
rsqog, dxoXoidwg np cpdo'/stv ndvr' sl8svat, 'AXydrj Adyov
iniyqaipsv avrov rd ^i^Xiov.
n. THE GOSPELS AS A WHOLE.
Origen c. Celsum, II. 13. Msrd ravrd cpyatv b naqd rip
KiXaijr 'lovdalog, on "noXXd sywv Xiysiv nsqt nov '/ard rdv 'Iq
aovv ysvofiivcov xat aXydfj, '/at ov naqanXfjaia rolg vnd rdv
fiadyrwv rov 'lyaov yqacpslatv, sxdv ixelva naqaXeinw."
Ibid. II. 15. Wqat 8i b KiXaog, on "xat fiadyrat rov
'lyaov, int nqdyjtan neqicpavel firj8ev eyovreg sniaxyxpaadai,
TOVTO inevdyaav, rd Xiyetv avrdv ndvra nqoeyvwxivai,"

celsus. 371
Ibid. II. 26. "En di Xiyst b naqd np KiXacp 'lov8alog nqdg
rovg lyaov fiadyrdg dg nXaaafiivovg ravra, on "ovdi xpsv8d-
fievot rd nXdofiara Vfidjv ntdavdg entxaXixpai ydvvydyrs. "
Ihid. II. 27. Msrd ravrd rtvag rdv niarsvdvrwv cpyatv "wg
sr/ fiidyg y'/ovrag sig rd icpsardvat avroig, fisrayaqdrrstv ix rfjg
nqdryg yqaqifjg rd EiayyiXiov rqtyfj xat rsTqayfj xat noXXaxy,
'/at fisranXdrrsiv, 'iv' s'xotsv nqdg roig iXiyyovg dqvsiadat."
Ibid. II. 74. Tavra fiiv ovv vfTiv i'/ rdv vfieriqwv avyyqafi-
fidnov icp' oig ovdevdg dXXov fidqrvqog yq-ytofisv, airot ydq sav
rolg nsqininrsrs.^
Ihid. V. 56. Eira E^yg, rd dfii'/ra '/at dvdjioia fityvvg '/at
E^Ofioidv aXX'yXoig, inicpiqEt rep nsqt rdv {dig cpqai) xara^s^q-
xdrwv E^fjy.ovra y s^dofzy'/ovra dyyiXwv Xdyqr nyydg dsqfiiov xard
airdv daxqvad'vrwv, on xat " nqdg rdv airov rov'lyaov rdcpov laidq-
yvrat iXyXvdivat vnd rtvcov fiiv dyysXoi 8vo, vno rivwv 8e sig."
Oix, oifiai, ryqfjaag Mardalov ftiv xat Mdq'/ov 'sva laroqy/ivat,
Aovxdv 8i '/at 'Iwdvvyv 8vo' dnsq oix yv ivavria. Ol ftiv ydq
dvayqdxpavrsg sva, rdv anoxvXiaavra rdv Xidov and rov jivyfisiov
rovrov cpaatv stvat' ol di roig dvo, rovg intardvrag ev iadfjrt
darqanrovarj ralg ysvofiivatg int fivrjfielov ywat^tv, 'y rovg deco-
qydivrag s'v8ov sv Xsv/olg '/ads^ofiivovg.
m. GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.
Origen c. Celsum, I. 28. 'Enst 8e '/at nqoawnonoisl, rqdnov
rtvd fitfiyadfisvog 'sv qrjtoqog naidiov slaaydfisvov, '/at sladyst
'lovdalov nqdg rdv 'lyaovv Xiyovrd nva fistqaxtwddg , xat oi8iv
CpiXoadcpov noXtdg d^tov cpiqs '/ard dvvafiiv xat raira i^erd-
aavreg i^eXiy^wfisv , on oi8i rd dq fidvov ndvry rip 'lovdaiqi
nqoawnov sv rolg Xsyofisvotg reryqrj'/e. Merd TavTot nqoaw-
nonoiel 'lovdalov ainp StaXeydfievov rip 'lyaov, xat eXiyyovra
airdv nsqt noXXwv fiiv, cog o'ierat ' nqwrov di, dg nXaaafii-
vov airov ti)j' sx naqdsvov ysvsatv dvstdi'QEt 8 avrip '/at snt
* These are the words Celsus puts into the mouth of the Jewish opponent
of Christianity ; and they show that Christians regarded their sacred hooks as
Jews regarded theirs. (Comp, John v. 39, 46,) See below quotation from 11.49,
xaSa xa\ Ciiti^ suyyeypajpaTe, Origen in reply claims to have convicted Celsus
of having put much nonsense (tcoXXoc Tt£(pXuapif)Tai) into the mouth of the "Jew"
which he did not get from the writings of the Gospels. This must refer to com
raents, not to stateraents, for the facts are all from the Gospels. See an exception
below, under No. VL, "Apocryphal Narratives." 24*

372 TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.
rip EX '/dfiyg airdv ysyovivat 'lov8ai'/fjg, xat and ywaixog iy-
ywqiov '/at nsviyqag, xat /e^j/^Ttdog. Oyat 8e avrfjv xat vnd
rov yfjfiavrog, ri'/rovog Tr^r rsyvyv 'dvrog, i^edad-at, sXeyxdelaav
dg fiefiotyevfiivyv. Eira Xiyet, dg sx^Xydslaa vnd rov dvdqdg,
'/at nXavwfiivy drifiwg O'/dnov iysvvyas rdv Iqaovv ' '/at 'on ov
rog did nsviav sig A'iyvnrov fiiadaqv-fja ag' '/a'/sl 8vvafisc6v ri
vwv nstqadstg, icp' atg Alyinnoi asfivvvovrai, snavfjXdsv, iv
ralg 8vvdfisai fiiya cpqovdv, '/at 8t' avrdg dsdv avrdv avqydqevae.
(Mat. ii. 2.)
Ibid. I. 38. "Ert 8s Xa^dv dnd ryg ysyqafifisvyg iv np xard
Mardalov eiayyeXico laroqiag neqt rov elg A'iyvnrov dno3e8y-
fiy/evai rdv 'lyaovv, rolg ftiv naqadd^otg sig roiro oi'/ iniarsv-
asv, cwd on dyysXog rovro syqyasv, o'vrs s'i rt yviaasro b '/ara-
Xmwv T^j' 'lovdaiav 'lyaovg xat iv Alyvnrcij inidrjfiwv dvsnXaas
di n 'srsqov, avyxaradifisvog ftiv nwg ralg naqadd^oig 8vvd-
fisaiv, ag lyaovg inoiyasv, iv aig rovg noXXoig snsiasv d'/fOXov-
dslv avrcp dg Xqianp' dta^dXXstv 8 airdg ^ovXdfisvog dg dnd
fiaysiag xal oi d-sic^ dvvdfist ysysvyjiivag' cpyat ydq airdv axd-
rtov rqacpivra fiiadaqvyaavra sig Atyvnrov dvvdfiswv Ti^wj/ nei-
qadivra, sxeldev inaveXdelv, dedv dt' exeivag rdg dvvdfisig sav
rdv dvayoqsvovra. (Mat. ii. 13.)
Ibid. I. 58. Msrd ravra b naqd np KiXac^ 'lovdalog dvrt
rdv EV np EvayysXicj) Mdywv XaX8aiovg cpyatv vnd roi 'lyaov
XeXiydat '/ivydivrag int rfj yeviaet airov iXyXvdivat nqoO'/vvy-
aovrag avrdv CTi vyntov cog dedv '/at 'Hqddy np rerqdqyrj rovro
8edyXwxevat ' rdv di nifixpavra , dno'xrslvat rovg iv tw aird
Xqdvcj} ysysvyjiivovg , old fisvov '/at rovrov dvsXslv avv airolg' firj
nwg, rdv airdq'/y int^idaag yqdvov ^aaiXsiay. "Oqa ovv iv
rovn^ rd naqd'/ovafia rov fiy dia-zqivovrog Mdyovg XaXdaiwv,
fiydi rdg snayysXiag diacpdqovg cyvaag airdv dswq'yaavrog , xat
8 id rovro xaraxpsvajafisvov ryg svayysXixrjg yqacpyg. Oix end a d'
onwg xat rd xivfjaav rovg Mdyovg asaiwny/s, '/at ov/ slnsv
aird sivai aariqa ocpdivra vn avrdv iv ry dvaroXjj, '/ard to
ysyqafiftivov. (Mat. ii.)
Und. I. 62. Msrd ravra 8' inst fiy8E rdv dqidfidv rcov dno
ardXwv sntardfisvog di'/a sinsv 'fj svds'/d rtvag s^aqryadfisvov
rdv 'lyaovv savrip snt^^yzovg dvdqwnovg, reXwvag xat vavrag
rovg novyqordrovg , fierd roirwv rjjde xd-/slas airdv dno8e8qa-

CELSUS. 373
'/svat alayqdg '/at yXiayqwg rqncpdg avvdyovra. Osqs '/at neqt
rovrwv, '/ard rd dvvardv, diaXd^wjisv cpavsqdv di iart rolg iv-
rvyydvovatv siayysXi'/olg Xdyoig, ovg oid' dvsyvwxivat b KiXaog
cpaivsrat, 'on 8io8exa dnoardXovg b 'iqaovg insXi^aro, '/.r.X. (Mat.
X. 1, &c. Also Mark iii. 14; Luke vi. 13, &c.)
Ibid. I. 66. Ent di rovroig s^yg b lovdalog nqdg rdv 'lyaoiv
naqd np KiXaio Xsysi' "ri ds xal as vrjniov sn syqfjv sig A'i
yvnrov E'/'/OfiiCsadai ; fifj dnoacpayyg; Qsdv ydq oi'/ sl'/dg yv
neqt davdrov dedtivat. 'AXX' dyyeXog fiiv fj/ev e§ oiqavov, xe-
Xevwv aot '/at rolg aolg oixeiotg cpevyeiv, fifj iyxaraXycpdivrsg
dnoddvyrs. OvXdaastv di as airddt b dio y8y 8td as nsnofi-
cpwg ayysXovg, b fiiyag Qedg rdv 't'dtov vldv, oi'/ idivaro;"
(Mat. ii.)
Ihid. II. 24. 'E^fjg 8e roiroig diXwv naqaarfjaat 'on dXyeivd
'/at dviaqd yv rd avfifidvra airip' '/at 'dn oiy oidv re fjv ^ov-
Xydivra airdv notyaat sivat aird fifj roiavra, Xiyei' "ri ovv
norvtdrat, xat odvqerat, '/at rdv rov oXidqov cpdqov eiyerai na-
qadqafielv, Xiycov dds nwg- w ndrsq sl divarai rd noryqiov rovro
naqeXdslv." (Mat. xxvi. 39.) — Kat iv rovroig di 'dqa rd rov
KiXaov '/a'/ovqyov . . . oi'/in di '/at rd airddsv ificpalvov t^v
nqdg rdv nariqa svai^siav airoi '/at fisyaXoxpvyiav, s^fjg rovrcij
dvaysyqafifiivov naqaridsrat, oiJTWg syov "nXfjv oix dg syd
diXw, dXX' wg ai." (Mat. xxvi. 39.)
Ibid. II. 45. Hqdaxsg di xat rip sninoXa'tc^ rem nsqt rcov
rdrs fiadyrdv 'lyaov Xdyov iv cp cpyatv "sira ol ftiv rdrs ^dvn
avnp avvdvrsg, '/at rfjg cpwvyg ina'/oiovrsg avrov, '/at 8i8aa'/dXq)
Xqdfisvot, '/oXatdfisvov x-at dnodvfja'/ovra bqdvrsg, ovrs awani-
davov, ovrs vnsqanidavov airov, oidi xoXdaewv '/aracpqovelv
insiadrjaav ' aXXd xat fjqvfjaavro eivai fiadrjzai' vvv di vfielg
airip awanodvya'/ere. " (Mat. xxvi. 56.)
Ihid. VI. 16- Msrd ravra ryv '/ard twv nXovaiwv andcpaaiv
TOV 'lyaoi elndvrog, " eixoncoreqov '/dfiyXov elaeXdelv did rqvn-rj-
fiarog qacpidog, '-y nXovaiov elg tj))' ^aaiXeiav roi Qeov, " cpyatv
dvri'/qvg dnd HXdrwvog elqyadai, rov 'lyaov naqacpdsiqavrog rd
HXarwvtxdv, iv olg sinsv 6 HXdrwv 'on "dyaddv 'dvra dtacpe-
qdvnog,^'/at nXovaiov eivat dtacpeqdvrwg, adivarov." Tig 8 ovx
dv, '/at fisrqicog scptardvsiv rolg nqdyfiaai 8vvdfisvog, rdv KiX
aov ysXdaai, oi twj' 7ri(rT£t;oj'TWJ' rep 'iqaoi fidvov, aXXd '/at rdv

374 TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.
?t,oinwv dvdqdncov, d'/oiwv 'drt 'lyaovg b naqd Iov8aioig ysysv-
vy fiivog '/at dvarsdqafifiivog , '/at 'iwayip rov ri'/rovog vofiiadstg
sivat vldg, '/at fiy8i yqdfifiara fisfiad-y/dg , ov fidvov rd EXXy
vwv, dXX' oidi rd 'E^qaiwv, onsq '/at al cptXaXfjdstg fiaqrvqovat
yqacpat rdv nsqt airdv, dviyvw HXarwva' '/at aqsadsig rfj nsqt
rcov nXovaiwv dnocpaivofiivy avrov Xi^si, dg "ddxjvardv sartv
dyaddv sivat diacpsqdvrcog '/at nXoiaiov," naqscpdeiqev airyv, xat
nenoiy/e rd, " ei'/ondreqov xdjiyXnv did rqvnf ftarog ^acpi8og
elaeXdelv, 'rj nXniatov sig rfjv ^aaiXeiav rov Qsov;" El 8i ftfj
fisrd rov fiiaslv xat dnsyddvsadat ivrvydv rolg EvayysXioig,
cpiXaXfjdyg yv 6 KiXaog, iniaryaev, '/.r.X. (Mat. xix. 24; xiii. 55.)
rv. MAEK AND LUKE.
Origen c. Celsum, I. 41. "Eart 8' b 'Iov8alog airip en ravra
Xiywv, nqdg ov bfioXoyovfisv eivat Kiqtov fjficov, rdv lyaovv
" Xovofiivijj, cpqat, aot naqd np 'iwdvvy cpdajia 'dqvtdog i^ aiqog
Xiysig sntnrfjvat. " Eira nvvdavdfisvog b naq' avrip lovdalog
cpqat' "rig rnvzo stdsv d^idyqEcog jidqzvg rd cpdofia; 'y rig yx,ov-
aev e§ ovqavov cpcovyg elanoiovayg ae vldv np Qsip, nXyv 'on av
cp-fjg, '/ai nva sva indyy twv ^i£Ta aov '/exoXaa fiivwv ;" (Mat.
iii. 16; Mark i. 10; Luke iii. 22.)
Ibid. I. 63. Enst di '/at sniqqfjiovg etnsv avdqwnovg rsXw-
vag '/at vavrag novyqordrovg Xiywv b KiXaog rovg dnoardXovg
'lyaov, '/at nsqt roirov cpyaofisv 'on soi'/sv, 'iva fiiv iy/aXiay
rip Xdyc^, niarsvstv onov diXst rolg yeyqafifiivotg , "iva 8e t^v
ificpaivofiivyv detdrrjza ev rolg airolg ^i^Xiotg dnayyeXXofiivyv
fifj naqadi.^Tjzat, dntarelv rolg EiayysXioig' 8sov rd cpiXdXydsg
idovra twv yqaxpdvrwv, sx T^g nsqi riov ystqdvwv avayqacpfjg
niareiaat '/at neqt twv detoriqwv. liyqanrat dfj iv ry Baqvd§a
xadoXtxjj EntaroXfj {odsv b KiXaog Xa^dv rdya einev sivat sni^-
qfjTOvg xat novyqordrovg rovg dnoardXovg) on i^sXi^aro roig
Idiovg anoardXovg lyaovg, 'dvrag vniq ndaav dvojiiav dvofiwri-
qovg. Kat sv rip EiayysXic^ ds np '/azd Aov/dv cpyat nqdg rdv
lyaovv 0 Hirqog' "e^eXde dn' ifinv, bzi dvfjq dfiaqzwXdg el fit,
Kvqie." (Luke v. 8.)
Ihid. II. 18. 'E^fjg di roirq) '/at dXXo svqdig cpyaiv b naqd
Tcp KsXauj lovdalog, on "ndg, sinsq nqosins '/at rdv nqodw-
aovra '/at rdv dqvqadiisvov, oix dv dg dsdv Ecpo^fjOrjaav, dg rdv

CELSUS. 375
fiiv fifj nqodovvai eti, tov 8i fiy dqvrjaaadai ;" (Luke ix. 44;
Mark ix. 31.)
Ibid. II. 32. 'EyxaXdv 8i rjj ysvsaXoyia, rd jiiv xat naqd
Xqianavolg ^yrovfisva, xat vnd rivcov dg iy/Xy fiara nqoaayn-
fieva TJj dtaipwvi^ rcov yeveaXoyidv, ovdafiiHg wvdfiaaev. Ov ydq
ydet b cog dXyddg dXa^cdv KiXaog '/at inayyeXXdfisvng sldivat
ndvra rd Xqiariavwv, cpqnvificog inannqyaat ry yqacpfj. (Dqat
ds anyvdadyadat roig ysvsaXoyrjaavrag dnd rov nqwrov cpivrog
'/at TWV EV 'lovdaiotg §aatXiwv rdv 'Iqaovv. Kat o'israi rt sla-
cpiqeiv yevvalov, 'on " ov'/ dv fj rov ri'/rovog yvvfj ryXtxovrov yi
vovg rvyydvovaa fjyvdet. " (Luke iii. ; Mat. i.)
Ibid. II. 48. Kat vijv ds cpqatv olovst fjfidg dno'/qivaadat,
on did TOVT ivofiiaafisv avrdv sivat vldv Qsov, "inst ywXnvg
'/at rvcpXovg idsqdnsvas." Hqoaridyat 8i '/at rd' "cog vfislg
cpazE, aviary vs'/qoig." (Ma,t. xi. 5; Luke iv. 18.)
Ihid. II. 59. O'israi di rsqarsiav slvai '/at rdv asiOfidv '/at
rdv axdrov, nsqt cov, xard rd dvvarpv, iv rolg dvcoziqw dnsXoy-
yadfisda, naqadifievot rdv OXiynvra, laroqfjaavra -/ard rdv
xqdvov rov nddovg rov 2wrfjqog roiavra dnyvry/ivai' "xat 'ort
tjdv fiiv oi'/ in'fjq'/Easv saiyzip, vs'/qdg d' dviary '/at rd ayfisla
rfjg xoXdaswg sdst^sv b 'lyaovg, xat rdg yslqag, dg yaav nsnsqo-
vyfiivat." . . . Etd s^fjg rovroig elndv rd and roi EvayyeXiov
'on rd ayfisla rrjg '/oXdascog sdst^sv avaardg i'/ vsxqwv, xat rdg
yslqag wg yaav nsnsqovyfiivai, nvvdavsrat, xat Xiyst' "rig rovro
sids;" '/at rd nsqt Maqiag T^g May8aXyvfjg 8ia§dXXwv, dvayqa-
cpofiivyg swqaxivat, sins' "yvvy ndqoiarqog, cog cpari." Kat
snst fifj fidvy avry avayiyqanrai swqaxivai dvaardvra rdv 'iq
aovv, dXXd xat 'dXXot' xat ravra '/axyyoqdv b KiXaov 'lovdalog
cpyat, "xat s'i Tig dXXog twv e/ T^g airyg yoyreiag." (John xx.
27; Mark xvi. 8.)
Ihid. II. 63. MeT« TailTa o KiXaog, oix eixaracpqovfjzcog
rd yeyqafifiiva xa'/oXoydv, cpqatv, on "iyqfjv, e'ineq 'ovrwg deiav
dvvafiiv E'/cpyfjvat ydeXev b lyaovg, avroig rolg inyqedaaat, '/at
rip '/ara8txdaavri, '/at oXwg ndaiv dcpdyvat."

Origen c. Celsum, I. 50. Kat oi'/ ni8' 'onwg ^ovXdfievog '/at
kziqoig nsqidslvat rd dvvaadat vnovosiadat, on avrot yaav ol

376 TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.
nqocprjzsvdivrsg, cpyatv, 'on "ol fiiv svdovatdvrsg, ol 8s aysiqov-
rsg, cpaatv rjxsiv dvwdsv vldv Qsov." (John iii. 31; viii. 23.)
Ihid. I. 67. Msrd ravrd cpqaiv b naqd rip KiXacp 'lovdalog,
wg cptXofiadfjg Tig "EXXyv, '/at rd 'EXX-yvwv nsnatdsvfisvog, on "ol
fiiv naXatot fivd-ot Heqael, '/at 'Aficpiovt, '/at A'taxcp, xal Mivcoi
delav anoqdv veifiavreg, oi8' airolg iniarsvaafisv bfiwg ini-
Sei^av savrdv s'qya ftsydXa xat davfiaard, dXyddg rs vniq dv
dqwnov, 'iva fifj dnidavot 8o'/dat' av 8i 8y ri '/aXdv y davfid-
aiov s'qyij) fj Xdyq) nsnoiy/ag; fjfilv oidiv insdsi^w '/airot nqo-
'/aXovfiivcov iv rip Isqip ae naqaayiadat Ti evaqyeg yvwqtafia,
dg e'iyg b rov Qeov nalg." (John ii. 18; x. 24; Mat. xxi. 23.)
Ihid. I. 70. Aiyei 8' 'on "oi8E roiavra atrelrat adfia
Qeov'" dg sywv airdv naqaarfjaat dnd twv EiayyeXtxcov yqafi
fidrwv airoifievov, xat nola airoifievov. 'AXX sarw, Xsyirw av
rdv fiefiqco'/ivat fierd rdv fiadrjzdv rd ndaya, oi fidvov elnovra
TO' "sntdvfi'icx insdvfiyaa rovro rd ndaxci cpayslv fisd' vfidv"
aXXd '/at ^E^qwxdra. Asysrw d' ixirdv '/at dtxp-yaavra naqd rfj
nyyfj rov 'la'/d§ nenw'/svat, ri rovro nqdg rd nsqt roi adfiarog
avrov vcp fjfiwv Xsydfisva; 2acpiog ds cpaivsrat lydvog fisrd rfjv
avdaraatv ^s^qw/wg' xard ydq fjfidg acofia dvsiXycpsv, dg ysvd
fisvog ix yvvai'/dg. "'AXV aids aiofia," cpyat, "Qsov yqyrat
roiairy cpwvfj, oidi roi^ds netdol." (Luke xxii. 15; John iv. 6;
xxi. 13.)
Ibid. II. 31. Merd ravra Xqtartavolg eyxaXel, "wg aocpt-
Kofiivoig sv np Xiysiv rdv vldv rov Qsov stvat avroXdyov," xal
o'israi ys xqarvvsiv rd s'yxXyfia ' inst " Xdyov inayysXXdfisvot vldv
sivat rov Qsov, dnodsi'/vvfisv ov Xdyov xadaqdv '/at dytov, dXXd
dvdqwnov arifidrarov dnaydsvra dnorvfinaviadsvra. (John i.)
Ihid. JJ. 36. Eird cprjatv b KiXaog' "ri xat dvaaxoXont^o-
fiivov TOV adfiarog nolog lywq, otdg nsq rs qist fia'/dqsaat ds-
oiaiv;" (John xix. 34.)
Ihid. II. 49. '0 di KiXaog, '/oivonotyaat ^ovXdfievog rd rsq-
dana rov 'lyaov nqdg rfjv sv avdqwnoig yoyrsiav, cpqatv avralg
Xi^satv '^£i cpdg '/at dXydsta^ , ry avroi cpwvy dta^qrjdyv s^-
ayoqsisi, xadd '/at vfielg avyyeyqdcpare dtdrt naqiaovrat vjiiv '/at
' The exclaraation O tptos xat aXu) Scia is by sorae supposed to take up the
leading words of John's Gospel — John i, 9, &c.

CELSUS. 377
ETsqot dvvafisaiv ofioiaig yqwfisvoi '/a'/ot xat yoyreg' '/at aaravdv
nva roiavra naqajiyyavdfievov 6vofidt,ei.^ (Mat. xxiv. 23, &c.)
TI. APOCEYPHAL NAREAIIVES.
Origen c. Celsum, I. 28. (See before, p. 371.)
Ibid. I. 32. AXXd ydq inaviXdwfisv sig t^v roi 'invSainv
nqoawnonoitav , iv jj avayiyqanrai fj roi 'lyanv fifjzyq '/vovaa
wg sgwdslaa vnd rov fivyarsvaafiivov airfjv rixrovog iXsydslaa
snt fiorysiijc, xat rixrovaa and rtvog arqariwrnv Havdfjqa rov-
vofia ' xat I'dwfisv, sl fiy rvcpXdg nl fivdonoiyaavreg ryv fiotysiav
rqg naqdsvov '/at rov Havdfjqa, '/at rdv rixrova i^coadfisvnv
avrfjv, ravra ndvra avinXaaav int '/a&aiqiaet ryg naqadd^ov
dnd dyinv Hveifiarog avXX'fjXpswg. vn. THE EPISTLES.*
Origen c. Celsum, I. 9. Oyat di "nvdg fiyds §ovXofiEvovg
dtddvat 'y Xafi^dvsiv Xdyov neqt wv niarevovai, yqfjadai np, My
s^sra^E, aXXd niarsvaov xai' 'H niang aov adast ai." Kat
cpyaiv avrovg Xiysiv Kaxnv fj iv rip ^ici) aocpia, dyaddv 8' fj
fiwqia. (1 Pet. iii. 15; 1 Cor. iii. 19.)
Ibid. V. 64. '.^XX' ovrog, b ndvr' sl8ivaL snayysXXdfisvog,
'/at rotavrd cpyat' "ndvrwv 8s" cpyaiv, "dxoiay rdv int roaoi
rov 8isaryxdrwv, 'xat acpdg airovg ralg sqiaiv aYaytara 8tsXEy-
xdvrwv, Xsyovrwv rd, ifiot '/dafiog iaravqwrat, xdyio rip
'/dafic^" rovro ydq fidvov dnd rov HaiXov sotxe fisfivyfiovsvxs-
vat b KiXaog. (Gal. vi. 14.)
Ihid. VI. 12. Aid fiera^aivwfiev in' dXXyv KiXaov xarrjyo-
qiav, ovdi rdg Xs^sig fjfidv stddrog, dXX' ix naqaxovofiariwv
cp-fjaavrpg, 'on "cpafiiv tijv sv avdqwnoig aocp'tav fiwqiav sivat
naqd Qscp'" rov HaiXov Xiyovrog, "fj aocpia roi '/da fiov fiwqia
naqd Qsip iart"' xai cpyaiv b KiXaog, on "fj rovrov alria '/at
ndXat siqyrat." O'ierat ds alriav stvat rd ^ovXsadai fjfidg did
* See before, Note on II. 74. Those references to the birth and childhood
of Jesus are the only Apocryphal additions to the Evangelical record made by
Celsus, 5 Celsus, as dealing with the historical basis of Christianity and with the
Person of its founder, did not study the Epistles : but he seems to have read
them, or sorae of them.

378 * TESTIMONIES OF HEATHEN.
T^g Xi^Ewg Tat;Tj;g rovg dnai8evrovg xal yXidiovg nqoaayeadat
fidvovg. (1 Cor. iii. 19.)
Ibid. VI. 42. 'E^fjg ds rovroig dnd dXXyg dqyyg 6 KiXaog
Totavrd cpyat '/ad' fjfiiov, "acpdXXnvrai di das^iarara, drra '/at
nsqt ryvde rfjv fieyiaryv ayvniav bfioiwg dnd deicov alvtyfidrwv
nsnXavyjiEvqv, noiovvrsg np Qscp ivavriov rtvd, did^oXdv rs /at
yXwrrrj 'E§qaicx Aaravdv ovofidt,ovrsg rdv airdv. "AXXwg fiiv ovv
navrsXdg dvrjzd ravra, '/at oi8' baia Xsysiv, on 8fj b fiiyiarog
©eog, ^ovXdfiEvdg rt avdqwnoig wcpsXfjaai, rdv dvrinqdaaovra
syst, '/at ddvvarsl. '0 rdv Qsov nalg dqa jjTTCTai vnd rov 8ta-
§dXov' '/at xoXatd fisvog vn' airov, 8i8da'xsi 'xat fjfidg rdv vnd
roirov xoXdascov xaracpqnvslv , naqayoqsvwv, dg dqa b 2aravdg
xat airdg bfioiwg cpavsig intdei^erai fieydXa i'qya '/at d-avjiaard,
acpereqi^dfievog rfjv rav Qeov dd^av oig oi yqfjvai nqoaiyeiv §ov-
Xydivrag anorqinsadai i'/slvov, dXXd fidviij niareieiv savnp.
Tavra fiiv yi iartv dvnxqvg dvdqdnnv ydyrog, sqyoXa^ovvrog
'/at nqocpvXarrofiivov rovg dvrido^ovvrdg rs xat dvraysiqovrag."
(2 Thess. ii. 4, &c.)
Ibid. VIII. 24. "Idwfisv di oig yqfjzai b KiXaog Xdyoig, nqo-
rqinwv fjfidg snt rfjv yqfjaiv riov sl8wXodvrcov, xai rdg 8yfiOTS-
Xelg EV 8yfiorsXiaiv soqralg dvaiag. "A 8e Xiyet, rotavrd iartv,
"el fiiv oi8iv raird ian rd e'L8coXa, ri deivdv xoivwvyaat T^g
navdotviag; el d' elai nveg daifioveg, dyXovdrt '/at ovrot rov
Qeov elaiv, otg '/at ntarevriov '/at '/aXXieqyriov '/ard vdfiovg xat
nqoaevxTEOv, 'iv' sifisvslg wai." Xqyaifiov d' sig ravra bXov rdv
nsqt sldwXodvrwv Xdyov, slqyfiivov naqd Tip HavXq) ev ry nqo-
riqcf nqdg Koqivdiovg 'EntaroXfj Xa^eiv elg yelqag '/at aacpyviaat.
(1 Cor. viii. 4-11.)
11. Porphyry. 1
Eus. H. E. VI. 19. Ti del ravra Xiyetv. ore /at b xad' fjfidg
iv 2i'/sXia xaraardg Hoqcpiqiog , avyyqdfifiara xad' fjfidv svary-
' Jerome, Ep, LXX. Ad Magnum Oratorem Eomanum (Vallars. Vol. I. 425),
says : " Scripserunt contra nos Celsus atque Porph-yrius : priori Origenes, alteri Metho
dius, Eusebius et Apollinarius fortissi-me responderunt. Quorum Origenes octo scripsit
libros. Methodius usque ad decem millia procedit versuum. Eusebius et ApoUinari-us
viginti quinque, et triginta volumina condiderunt." Porphyry was a native of Tyre,
or, as sorae say, of Batanea (Bashan) in Syria, whence the narae " Bataneotes,"

CELSUS AND PORPHYRY. 379
adfievog' xat 8i avrdv rdg deiag yqaq)dg 8ia^dXXetv neneiqa-
fiivog, rdv rs sig airdg s^yyyaafisvwv fivyfiovevaag, fiydiv fiy8a-
fiwg CpaiXov sy/Xyfia rolg ddyjtaatv snt^aXelv 8-wydetg, dnoqicje
Xdywv, int rd Xotdoqelv rqinerai, xat rovg e^yyrjrdg Sta^dXXeiv,
wv fidXtara rdv 'iiqtyevyv;
12. Celsus and Porphyry.
Chrysost Homil. 6. in Ep. I. ad Corinth. (Tom. V. p. 58.)
JTwg rd EiayyiXiov i^erddy navrayov T^g ol'/ovfiivyg; 'Ixavot
8i '/at 01 '/ad' fjfiiov elqy/dreg rfjv dqxatdrrjra ftaqrvqyaat rolg
§i§XLOig, oi neqt KiXanv xat rdv Baravswryv rdv fisr' i'/slvov
oi ydq dfj rolg fier' avrovg avvredslaav avriXeyov.
He was a pupil of Origen, and flourished in the end of the third century. He
wrote a treatise against Christianity in 15 Books, There are many references to
him by Jerome in his Coraraent. on Galatians and elsewhere. He dwelt upon
the inconsistencies in Scripture, on the dispute between Peter and Paul (Galat. ii,),
and advanced other objections of the same kind. His friend Amelius raight also
be quoted as attesting the existence of the Gospel of John. See Eus, Praep,
Evang. XL 18. p, 639.

PART m.
TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.

383

ni.
TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.

1. Simon Magus.*
Iren. Haer. B. I. 27. 4. {Simon the first Heretic) Omnes,
qui quoquo modo adulterant veritatem et praeconium ecclesiae
laedunt, Simonis Samaritani Magi discipuli et successores sunt.
(See Acts viii. 9.)
Hippol. Bef. Haer. VI. 9. Ol'/yryqiov 8i Xiyet sivat rdv dv
dqconov rovrov rdv s§ alfidrwv yeyevvy fisvov, xat xarot-
xelv EV avnp rfjv aniqavrov divajitv, yv ^i^av eivat rdv 'dXwv
cpyaiv. (John i. 13.) ^
' Simon Magus was "the hero of the romance of heresy," and as such
occupies a great part of the Clementine narratives. According to Irenaeus, B, I.
23, Hippol. VI, 9, 14, &o., he was a man of great power, the framer of a
system the cardinal tenet of the cosmogony of which was the degradation of »
thought of God ('Evvoia), chained by the spirits she had created, until she ap
peared as a degraded woman. She had appeared in many female forms, among
others as Helen of Troy, and as Helena she accompanied Simon in his wander
ings, Simon himself, as the primal Manifestation of the suprerae God, had come
to set the captive 'Evvo£a free (Iren. B, I, 23. 3), All the manifestations of God
as Father, Son, and Spirit, were only modes or SuvctfJiei? of the same God, Simon
was unlike other Gnostics in claiming for himself the supreme place and power.
He was Tfj dOvam? tou 0eo5 ¦^" (ieyaXif), Acts viii. 10, Hippolytus bases his de
scription of the system on the Scripture of the Simonians called 'Aito'ipaCTi? (jie-
yaXif) , which he regards as a genuine work of Simon, It may have originated
with his successor Menander (see Milman, Hist, of Christianity II, 50). In the
system of Simon the Holy Ghost is female. This suggests the sirailar teaching in
the baptisraal invocation in the Apocryphal " Acts of Thomas," " Come, O Mother
of compassion ; Come, O Mother who revealest hidden mysteries, that we may at
tain to the rest which is in the Eighth Mansion." So also in the 'Gospel of
the Hebrews ' (see below), the Holy Spirit is called the Mother of Christ, The
peculiarity of Simon's systera is its subordinating Christ to the Gnostic hiraself
2 It is not clear how far these words are Simon's, and how far Hippolytus's
own. They are preceded by an exact quotation to which the preface is Xi-^m-t outw;.

384 TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.
Ihid. VI. 10. 'AXXd nsqt T^g i'/'/qiaswg airov xat diaxqioEwg
I'/avwg, cprjatv, Eiqij/sv fj yqacpfj, '/at 7zqdg 8t8aa'/aXiav aq'/sl rolg
E^Ei'/ovtaftivotg rd Xsydiv ort ndaa adq^ xoqr^og, '/at
ndaa dd^a aaqxdg dgdvdog xdqrov. 'E^yqdvd-y b xdq-
rog, '/at rd dvdog avrov i^insas' rd di qfjfia Kvqiov
fiivst elg rdv aldva. (IPet. i. 24, 25.)
Ibid. VI. 14. Tovro iart, cpyat, rd slqyfiivov "Iva jifj aiv
rep xoa ficj) xaraxqtddfisv. (1 Cor. xi. 32.)
Ihid. VI. 16. 'Eyyvg ydq nov, cpyatv, fj d^ivy naqd rdg
qi^ag rov 8Ev8qov' ndv 8iv8qov, cpyat, fifj notovv '/aq
ndv xaXdv Exxdnrerat '/at elg nvq ^dXXerat. (Mat.
iii. 10.)
Ibid. VI. 19. Td nqd^arov rd nsnXavy fisvov. (Luke xv. 6.)^
(The following may be an echo.) Ibid. VI. 9. Fiyovs fiiv
ydq cpyaiv b xaqndg 'iva sig rfjv dnoOyxyv rsdy, rd di dyvqov
'iva naqadodjj rip nvqt. (Mat. iii. 12; Luke iii. 17.)
2. Cerinthus.^
Epiph. Haer. L 1 2. h. 28. p. 113. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 383.) (Con
cerning the Corinthians.) Xqdvrai ydq rip xard Mardalov Ei-
ayysX'ico dnd fiiqovg, xat oiyt bXcj)' dXXd did t»)v yeveaXoyiav
s Compare Iren. B. I. 23. 2 : Hanc esse perditam ovem. The reference is to
Helena, the impersonate captive Ennoea of Simon's system.
1 There is little known with certainty about Cerinthus, He is the traditional
opponent of the Apostle John, and is regarded as a Judaeo-Christian Gnostic,
The extracts in the text from Epiphanius are substantially conflrmed by Hippol.
VII, 33, and by Irenaeus, B, I, 26. 1; B, HI. 11, 1; (B, HL 12. 7?). For some
notice of his connection with the Apocalypse in tradition and in controversy see
before, p, 343, "Caius," He is not mentioned by Justin, Clem. Alex,, Tertul
lian, or Origen. He represented in Ephesus the Orientalism which regarded the
unknown as the supreme source of all, and the raaterial world as the work of
inferior beings. He was the first noted man who confined Christ's redeeming
work to enlightening the intellect. Ignorance, not perversity, becomes in this
view the parent of sin. He professed to derive his knowledge from angelic re
velation. There is every reason to accept the tradition which represents John
as writing his Gospel to overthrow the errors of Cerinthus (Iren. B. Ill, 11, 1).
Cerinthus, though he believed that the Aeon Christ descended upon the man
Jesus at his Baptism, and ascended from Him before the crucifixion, believed
also that the crucified Jesus rose from the dead (Iren. B. I, 26. 2), See Man-
sel's Gnosticism p. 115, The picturesqueness of the idea that Cerinthus, whom
the Church regards as the chief enemy iu the eye of the Fourth Evangelist, might
be, notwithstanding, the author of the Gospel, has attracted M. Renan ; but except
that it is picturesque he has not much to suggest in support of it, (Eenan,
L'Eglise chretienne, p, 53.)

CERINTHUS. NAASSENES OR OPHITES. 385
T^v svaaq'/ov, '/at ravrqv fiaqrvqiav cpiqovaiv dnd rov Evayye
Xiov, naXiv Xsyovreg on A q'/erdv np fiadyrjj 'iva yivyrai
cog b diddaxaXog. (Mat. x. 25.) . . . Tdv di HavXov ddernvai,
did rd fifj nsidsadai rfj nsqtrnfi'jj. 'AXXd '/at s/^aXXovaiv ai
rdv, did TO Eiqrj/ivai' "Oani iv vdfioj di'/atavade, Tiyg yd
qirng i^enia are '/at 'nri 'Edv neqirs fivyads, Xqiardg
v flag oidiv dcpsXyasi. (Gal. v. 4, 2.)
Ibid. L t. 2. h. 30. p. 138. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 429.) (Con
cerning the Ebionites.) '0 fiiv ydq Kqqivdog '/at Kaqno'/qdg,
rip avnp yqcofisvnt dfjdsv naq' airnlg EiayysXiqr dnd rfjg aqyfjg
rnv '/ard Mardalnv EvayysXiov did T^g yeveaXoyiag, (ioiXovrat
naqiardv ir/ aniqfiarog 'icoaycp '/at Maqiag sivai rdv Xqtardv.
Ovroi di aXXa nvd diavoovvrai. Haqw/dxpavrsg ydq rdg naqd
rip Mardaiq) ysvsaXoyiag, dqyovrai rfjv dqyfjv notsladai, dg nqo-
sinofisv, Xiyovrsg hri " Eyivsro," cpqaiv, "iv ralg fjfiiqatg 'Hqw
dov ^aaiXiwg . . . qXdi Ttg 'Icodvvyg," x.r.X.-
3. Naassenes or Ophites.^
Hippol. Bef. Haer. V. 7. (Duncker, p. 142.) Tovrov sivai cpq
atv dyaddv fidvov, xat nsqt rovrov XsXiydai rd vnd rov ^wrfjqog
5 See before, p. 139, extracts from Epiphanius,
' Irenaeus names Ophites among those who came up like mushrooms (B, I.
29. 1), and regards them as fathers and mothers of the school of Valentinus
(B. I, 31, 3), and as predecessors of Valentinus (B, II, Preface), So also Hippo
lytus (VI, 6) sets the Ophites down as progenitors of subsequent sects, and ainong
these he even reckons Simon Magus and his followers. They seem therefore to
belong to the first century, Hippolytus says they originally called themselves
" Naassenes " from the Hebrew (sifjj a serpent) (V, 6), but subsequently " Gnos
tics," alleging that they alone had the gift of knowledge. He says that they
used the Gospel according to the Egyptians (V, 7. p. 136), which described the
changes of the soul. He also shows at great length, and with bewildering mi
nuteness, that the Naassenes, who falsely ascribed the origin of their system to
James the Lord's brother through M.iriamne, are really indebted for it to the
ancient "mysteries" of Egypt and Phrygia (V. 7), There were several subdivi
sions of the Ophite Heresies : Peratae, Cainites, Sethians, and Justinians. They
reverenced the serpent of 0. T, history, whose opposition to the Creator of the
world won their respect. It is superfluous to say that they were struggling with
the old and ever new difficulty of the origin of evil, and of the connection of
human sin with the material framework of the human body. In some of them
we may see also the deification of mere intellect, for the Serpent was re
garded as the intellectual emancipator of enslaved or imperfect man. From By-
thos or primal Light, the Father of all and the first man, went forth 'E\i\ioia
which produced a Son, the second man. Below those was the Holy Spirit — a
female ; and from the union of Father and Son with the Spirit was produced the
25

386 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
Xsydfisvov Ti fis Xsysig dyaddv; sig sartv dyaddg, bna-
riqq fiov b iv rolg oiqavolg (Mat. xix. 17; Mark x. 18; Luke
xviii. 10) og avariXXst rdv yXtov avrov int 8t'/aiovg
¦/at u8i'/ovg '/at ^qiysi int baiovg xat int dfiaqrco-
Xovg. (Mat. v. 45; compare Rom. i. 20-26.)
Ibid. c. 8. (p. 158.) Tovro, cpqaiv, iart to slqyfiivov T depot
iari '/s'/ovtafiivot, yifiovrsg, cpqatv, sawdsv oar iwv vs
'/qdv. (Mat. xxiii. 27.)
Ibid. Kat ndXtv, cpyaiv, s'iqy/sv b ^wr'rjq' Oi ndg b Xi
ywv fiot Kiqis, Kvqts, elasXsvasrai sig Tiyv §aatXsiav
rdv ovqaviHv, dXX' b notdv rd d-iXyfia rov narqdg fiov
TOV ev rolg oiqavolg. (Mat. vii. 21.)
Ibid. Kat ndXtv, cpyatv, s'iqy/sv Ol reXdvat '/at a I
ndqvat nqodyovatv vfj.dg elg rfjv ^aatXsiav rdv oiqa
vwv . . . fjfislg di, cpyatv, iafiiv ol rsXdvai, sig ovg rd
riXy TWV aldvwv '/aryvry/s. (Mat. xxi. 31; 1 Cor. x. 11.)
Ihid. (p. 160.) Tovro, cpqatv, iart rd slqqfiivov Hdv div-
8qov fifj notovv 'xaqndv '/aXdv i'/'/dnrsrat '/at elg nvq
^dXXsrai. (Mat. iii. 10; Luke iii. 9.)
Ibid. Tovrianv o Xiyst, cpyai' Mfj ^dXyre rd ay iov
rolg '/vat fiydi roig fiaqyaqirag rolg yoiqoig. (Mat.
vii. 6.)^
third male — an incorruptible light — called Christ, Under those corae the eleraents,
and eventually the Serpent, from which come directly the spirit, the soul, and
all mundane things. Those "endless genealogies" (1 Tim, i. 4) and the angel-
worship (Col. ii, 18) may show us what wild notions were afloat in Phrygia
and Asia Minor in St Paul's day. Baur (Gnosis, pp. 118, 198) has drawn atten
tion to the importance of the subdivisions of the Ophites, — ail of thera aiming
at the development of the true principles which had been obscured or imprisoned
in the Creation and Government of the world. Cain, the Sodomites, &c., were
by raost of them regarded as the overmatched upholders of the Truth. Chris
tianity was the completion of those scattered and obscured lights. The ' Gospel
of Judas' was current among some of them. Others looked back to Seth as the
father of the spiritual species, and they maintained a more ordinary morality, —
hence called Sethians. Some Gnostics kindred to the Ophites (Baur p, 193) had
a "Gospel of Perfection " — teXsluoii; — called also the Gospel of Eve, showing how
the betteE state of things struggled for the mastery from the day of Eve till the
Christian Era. Hippolytus, V. 6, quotes as the motto of the Naassenes, 'Ap^i^ ¦
TsXetoSoetos yvuai;, yvtoai; a7:TipTtt;fji,e'vT| TeXeitoais.
* See additional references. V. 8. p, 160 (The Sotoer), as iu Luke viii. 5,
Mat. xiii. 3, Mark iv. 3 ; V. 8, p, 166 (The narrmo way), as in Mat, vii. 13 ; V, 9
(The grain of mustard), as in Mat. xiii. 31 ; V, 8, p, 152 {The hidden treasure and
the leaven), as in Mat. xiii. 33, 44. And briefer, or more as echoes, Mat, v. 15
and X. 27 (p, 144); Mat, xiii. 13 (p. 150);. Mat. ii, 18 (p. 162); Mat, vii. 13
(p. 164),

NAASSENES OE OPHITES. 387
Ihid. c. 7. (p. 140.) "Hvnsq cpqat t^v evrog dvdqwnov ^aai-
Xsiav ovqavcov ^yrnvfiivqv. (Luke xvii. 21.)^
Ihid. (p. 148.) Tovzian, cpqat, rd ysyqafifiivov Td ysysv-
vrjfiivov i'/ rfjg aaq'/dg, adq^ iart, '/at rd ysysvvqfiivov
i/ rov nvsv fiarog nvsvfia iariv. (John iii. 6.)*
Ihid. c. 8. (p. 150.) Hdvra ydq, cpyat, 8i' airov iyivsro '/at
ycoqtg avrov iyivsro ov8i 'ev 0 8i yiyovsv iv aizip tiofj ianv.
(John i. 3, 4.)
Ihid. (p. 152.) Kal rovrn iart rd vdcoq rd iv rnig '/aXolg
i.-/elvntg ydfinig, o arqixpag b 'lyaovg snoiyasv oivov. Avzy, cpq
aiv, iaztv fj fisydXq '/at dXydivfj dqyfj twv ayfisliov, yv inoi
yasv 0 lyanvg iv Kavd T^g laXiXatag, '/at iepaviqwa s
T^v §aaiXsiav riov ovqavcov. . (John ii. 1-11.)
Ihid. TnZrn, cpyatv, iart rd slqyfiivov vnd rov ^wrfjqog.
Edv fifj jiivqri finv rd aifia '/at epdyyri finv rfjv adq'/a, nv fiy
eiaiXdrjre elg rfjv ^aaiXeiav rcov ovqaviov, dXXd '/dv niyrs, cpqat,
rd noryqiov o iyco nivco, onov iyw vndyw, i'/sl vfislg elaeXdelv
oi divaads. (John vi. 53 ; viii. 21 ; xiii. 33 ; compare Mat. xx. 22
and Mark x. 38.)
Ihid. (p. 156.) Atd rovro, cpqai, Xiysi 6 'lyaoig' 'Eyd slfii ij
niXy fj dXydivfj. (Compare John x. 9.)
Ibid. c. 9. (p. 166.) Hvsvfia ydq, cpyatv, iartv b Qsdg' did,
cpqatv, ovrs iv rip 'dqsi rovrcj) nqoo'/vvovaiv, o'vrs iv
'IsqovaaXfjfi nl dXy&ivot nqoa'/vvqrat, dXXd iv nvsvfian. Hvev-
fiari'/fj ydq, cpqatv, iart rdv rsXsiwv fj nqoo'/ivqaig, ov aaq/i'/'fj,
(John iv. 21, &c.)
Ihid. (p. 172.) El di ng, cpyatv, iart rvcpXdg i'/ ysvsrfjg
'/at fifj rsdsafiivog cpdg rd dXydtvdv, o cpcori'Qst ndvra
s For additional references to Luke see parallels to passages from Matthew.
There is one passage, Hippol. Ref. Haer. V, 7 (p, 142), which reminds us of Luke
xvii, 4, but is not a quotation from Scripture: Kal touto IotI to e!pT)(AEvo^,
tptjalv, i-i TTi ypacpY) , etctcixi; TteaeiTai o' 6fxato; xal aMaaTTJOETai. There is also
a passage quoted (which follows the quotation given in the text from Luke
xvii. 21) as from "the Gospel inscribed According to Thoraas" which is not iu
the otherwise extant fragraents of that Gospel (Tisch,, Proleg, Evv, Apocr,
p. XXXIX): 'E.ue 6 ti,t\Tii-i eupiQaet £v TiaiSioti; airo ^tmv CTira- ^xei ydp i'i Tto
TECaapeaxaiScxaTU aiwvt xpupofjievo; (pavspoO[jLat. Hippolytus ascribes the passage
"not to Christ, but to Hippocrates."
* The following are selected from the numerous references to John's Gospel ;
others raay be added: Hippol. V. 8 (p. 158), (John vi, 44); V. 9 (p. 172),
John iv, 10, V, 19-27, vii, 14 ; V, 8 (p, 154), John iii. 8, v. 37. 25*

388 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
dvdqwnov iqyd fisvov elg rdv '/.da fiov, dt fjfidv ava^Xexp-
drw. (John ix. 1 and i. 9.)
Ihid. V. 7. (p. 138.) Td ydq ddqara airov dnd T?}g
XTi'ffewg, x.T.^. 'Ev ydq rovroig rolg Xdyoig, otg e'iqyxsv o Hav
Xog, '/.r.X.'' (Rom. i. 20.)
Peratae.
Hippol. Bef .Haer. V. 12. (p. 178.) Tovrd san, cpqat, rd sl
qyfiivov ov ydq yXdsv b vldg rov avdqdnov sig rdv
'/da fiov, dnoXiaat rdv '/oafiov, dXX' iva acodjj b '/da
fiog dt' airov. (John iii. 17; xii. 47.)
Ibid. F. 16. (p. 192.) Tovro iart, cpqat, rd slqyfiivov Kal
ov rqdnov vxpwas Mcovafjg rdv 'ocptv sv rjj iq-yficji, ovrcog
vxpwdfjvat dsl rdv vldv roi dvdqwnov. (John iii. 14.)
Ibid. V. 17. (p. 196,) "'Orav ovv, cpqat, Xiyy bawryq b na
ryq Vfidv iv rolg ovqavolg ixsivov Xiyst dcp' ov b vldg fie-
raXa^dv rovg yaqaxrfjqag fierevyvoysv ivddds. (Mat. vii. 11 ;
V. 48, &c.)
Ibid. V. 17. (p. 198.) Toir iart, cpqat, rd slqqfiivov 'Eyd
slfit fj diqa. (John X. 7.)'''
Ibid. V. 12. (p. 178.) "Orav di Xiyy, cpyatv, tva fifj avv np
'xdafict) '/ara/qidcofiev fj yqacpfj . . . (1 Cor. xi. 32.)
Ihid. (p. 178) (see also X. 10. p. 504.) Kat rofjro sivai cpyat
rd Xsydfisvov Hdv rd nX'qqwfia sidd'/yas xarot'/yaat sv
airip aio fiart'/dg '/at ndaa ianv iv avrip fj dsoryg 'tyg ovzco
dtyqyfiivyg rqiddog. (Col. ii. 9.)
Sethiani.^
Hippol. Bef. Haer. V. 21. (p. 212.) Tovto effTi, cpyat, rd si-
* Corapare a probable echo, Hippol. V. 7 (p, 146), Eom. x, 18. See quota
tions : Hippol. V, 8 (p, 158), 2 Cor, xii, 2-4, 1 Cor, ii. 13, 14; Hippol. V, 7
(p. 138), Gal. iii, 28, vi. 15; Hippol. V, 7 (p. 136), Eph. iii. 15; Ibid, (p, 146),
Eph, V. 14; Hippol. V. 8 (p, 156), Eph, ii, 17.
' See also Hippol. V, 16 (p. 194) for quotation of John i. 1-4 (with ye-
ypaitTaO) aud Hippol. V. 17 (p, 196) for quotation of John viii. 44 with OTaM
Se X£yr). • Other echoes may perhaps be found — Hippol, V, 19 (p. 206), compare
John iv. 14; 2 Cor, v. 2; also same page, Acts ii. 24.

JUSTIN. BASILIDES AND ISIDORUS. 389
qqfiivov oix rjXdov slq'fjvyv ^aXelv int t^v yfjv dXXd fid
yatqav, rovziazi rd diydaat xat ywqtaai rd avy/s'/qafiivcu
(Mat. X. 34.)
Ihid. X. 11. (p. 510) (see also V. 19.) Kat rovro sivat rd sl-
qqftsvov Og iv fioqcpjj Qsov vndqywv niy dqnay fidv yyy-
aarn ro sivai 'taa Qsd, dXX' savrdv s'/ivwas ftoqcpfjv
doiXov Xafidv. (Phil. ii. 6, 7.)

Justin.^
Hippol. Bef Haer. V. 23. (p. 214.) 'Hg ididao'/ev b Xdyog
roig fiadyrdg Xiywv Elg bddv idvcov fifj dniXdyrs. (Mat.
X. 5.) Ibid. V. 26. (p. 228.) Elncov di ry'Edifi' livat, dniystg aov
rdv vldv, rovriart rdv xpvyixdv dvdqwnnv xai rdv "yoi'/dv, aiTog
di sig yslqag naqad ifisvog rd nvsi fia rov narqdg, dv-
fjXdsv nqirg rdv dyaddv. (Compare John xix. 26 ; Luke xxiii. 46.)
4. Basilides and Isidorus. ^
Hippol. Bef. Haer. VII. 20. (p. 356.) {Basilides claimed to
have received instruction from Matthias.) BaaiXsidyg roivvv xat
'laidcoqog, 6 BaatXsidov nalg yvyaiog xat fiadyryg, cpaatv slqy-
'/ivat Blardiav airolg Xdyovg dnoxqvcpovg, ovg yxnvas naqd rov
Acorfjqog '/ar Idiav 8i8aydsig.
Eus. H. E. IV. 7. {He i^rote twenty four boohs on the Gospel.)
Hv sig fjfidg '/arfjXdsv iv rolg rdre yvwqifiwrdrov avyyqacpicog
'Ayqinna Kdaroqog I'/avdrarog '/ard BaatXeidov sXsyxog, r-qv
dsivdryra rfjg ravdqdg ano'/aXinrcov ynyrsiag. 'E'/cpaivcov 8' ovv
airnv rd dnd^qyra, cpyatv airdv sig jiiv rd siayyiXtnv riaaaqa
nqdg rolg si'/oai awrd^ai ^t^Xia, nqocpyrag di savrip dvofidaai
Baqxa^^dv '/at Baq/wcp, x.r.X.
• Justin, Compare also Hippol, Eef. Haer. V. 27 (p. 230) with John iv. 14 ;
v, 26 (p, 226) with Gal. v, 17.
' On Basilides see Introduction, where the quotations are discussed. Isi
dorus was his son. For Fragments of Isidorus's writings collected from Clem.
Alex, see Stieren's Irenaeus, I. p. 907.
» This is the first notice of the Gospel of Basilides. It is possible (so' Hilg.
and Hort) that Origen was mistaken. But see Introduction.

390 TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.
Orig. Hom. in Luc. Tom. III. p. 933. {Basilides 'dared to
write a Gospel.'^) See before, p. 82.
Hippol. Bef Haer. VIL 27. (p. 376.) {This Gospel was the
Theology of the Supramundane.) EiayysXiov iart '/ar airnvg y
rdv vnsq'/oafiiiov yvdatg, wg 8E8fjXcoTai, yv b fiiyag dqycov nv/
yniararo. Jerome: Prooem. in Mat. Tom. IV. p. 2. {Basilides's Gospel
mentioned) See before, p. 99.
Archelai et Manetis Disputatio. Routh, Rei. Sac. V. p. 196.
{Basilides's Tractates extant in a.d. 277.) Fuit predicator apud
Persas etiam Basilides quidam antiquior, non longe post nostro
rum Apostolorum tempora. . . . Extat etiam tertius decimus li
ber tractatuum ejus, cujus initium tale est, &c.^
Hippol. Bef Haer. VIL 27. (p. 378.) {The school of Basilides
accepted the Gospel narratives.) 'O 8i 'lyaovg yeyivyrai '/ar
airoig dg nqoeiqfj/afiev. leyevyfiivqg 8e rfjg ysviascog T^g nqo-
8s8yXwfiivTjg, yiyovs ndvra bfioiwg '/ar airovg rd nsqt rov Aco
ryqog dg iv rolg eiayyeXinig yiyqanrai.
Clem. Alex. Strom. III. 1. p. 508. Ol ftiv ovv dficpt rdv
OiaXevrivov dvwdev ix twv deicov nqo^oXwv rdg avtvyiag '/ara-
yaynvrsg svaqsarovvrat ydfiCji, ol 8i and BaatXsidov nvdofiivcov
cpaal TWV anoardXwv fifj nors afistvdv iart rd fiy yafislv ano-
xqivaadai Xiyovai rdv Kvqiov " Oi ndvrsg ycoqnvai^ rdv Xdyov
rovrov slat ydq sivovyoi, ol fiiv ex ysvsrfjg, ol 8i s^ dvdy/yg'"
i^yyovvrat 8i rd ^yrdv wdi nwg' '/.r.X. Kat rd "dfieivnv yafi-
fjaai y nvqnvadat," fiy elg nvq ifi^dXrjg tijv xpvyyv anv Xiyetv
rnv dndaroXov, vv/rdg '/at yfiiqag dvri'ywv '/at cpo^oifievng fiy
T^g iy/qareiag anoniayg' nqdg ydq rd avri'ysiv ysvofiivq xpvyfj
fisqitsrai T^g iXnidog. (Mat. xix. 11, 12; 1 Cor. vii. 9.)
^ That this book of Tractates is ,the same as that which Eusebius mentions
and Clora. Alex, quotes, there is no reason to doubt. Archelaus lived in the
time of the Emperor Probus, a.d. 277. His Disputation is mentioned by Jerome
and Epiphanius. The quotation refers to the dual origin of things, Basilides
— au Alexandrian — is here said to have taught in Persia, but we know too little
about the great heretic to regard this as impossible.
* The use of y^upoOat is peculiar; and there is no good reason to doubt the
quotation from Matthew when it is found. It has no parallel in the N. T,, and but
slight and few parallels in previous literature, (Sanday, Gospels in Second Cen
tury, p, 192.) See auyx^pouot used by Clement in the same chapter with the
sense of "confirm" or "sanction." Clem. Strora. III. 1. p, 510,

BASILIDES AND ISIDORUS. 391
Clem. Strom. IV. 12. p. 599. BaaiXei8yg 8i iv ryr si'/nard
rqirio twv s^yyqri'/dv nsqt nov '/ard rd fiaqriqinv xoXa^ofiivcov
avralg Xi^sat rdde cpyai' "cpqfii ydq rd bndant vnoninrnvat ralg
Xeynfitvaig dXixpsatv, yrot fjfiaqry/nreg iv dXXnig Xavddvovzeg
nraiafiaaiv eig rnvrn dynvzat rd dyaddv yqyardryn rov neqid-
yovrog, dXXa i§ dXXcov 'ovrwg iy/aXnv fievot, 'iva fiy dg '/arddr/nt
int '/a'/olg bfinXnyovfiivoig nddcoai, fiydi Xoidoqnifievni wg 6
fioiydg y n cpnvsvg, aXX on Xqianavot nscpv/drsg, 'dnsq airovg
7iaqqynqyast fiqds ndaysiv 8o'/Eiv ..." (IPet. iv. 14-16.)^
Orig. in Epist ad Bom. Lib. V. p. 549. (Migne, Vol, IV.
p. 1015.) "Et ego," inquit (sc. apostolus), "mortuus sum," coepit
enim jam mihi reputari peccatum. Sed haec Basilides non ad-
vertens de lege naturah debere intelligi, ad ineptias et impias
fabulas sermonem apostolicum traxit, et in fierevawfiarwaeiog
dogma, id est, quod animae in alia atque alia corpora trans-
fundantur, ex hoc apostoli dicto conatur astruere. Dixit enim,
inquit. Apostolus, quia, "Ego vivebam sine lege aliquando," hoc
est, antequam in istud corpus venirem, in ea specie corporis
vixi, quae sub lege non esset; pecudis scilicet vel avis. (Rom.
vii. 9, 10.)
Hippol. Bef Haer. VIL 22. See before, p. 173. (John i. 9.)
Ihid. VII. 26. (p. 374.) KarfjXdsv [ow] a^ro T^g 's§8ofid8og rd
cpcog, rd xarsXddv and rfjg oy8od8og avwdsv np vlcp T^g s^8ofid8og,
int rdv 'lyaovv rdv vldv rfjg Maqiag, '/at icpwriady aws^acpdEig
np cpcort rip Xdfixpavn sig airdv. Tovro iart, cpyat, rd slqyfii
vov Hvsvfia dytov insXsvasrat int ai, rd and T^g vio-
T/^TOg did rnv fiednqinv nvevfiarog int rfjv oy8od8a '/at rqv e/J-
8nfid8a dtsXddv fis'yql rrjg Maqiag, '/at dvvafiig vxpiarov
inia'/idasi am, fj dvvafiig TJyg '/qiascog dnd rqg dr/qwqeiag
dvwdev {Sia] rov 8yfiiovqynv fieyqt rfjg '/riaswg, b ian rov viov.
(Luke i. 35.)
Ibid. VIL 27. See before, p. 173. (John ii. 4; Mat. ii. 1, 2.)
Epiph. Haer. L t 2. h. 24. p. 72. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 313.)
Owqadrjasrai 8i ovrog (sc. BaaiXsidyg) 8ia^nXixfjv 8ivafitv sla-
rjynifisvng xard twv xpvyiov, dnaqvqatdetav avrdg i'/8L8da'/wv,
5 Compare Eus. H. E, IV, 7, where Basilides's views of the smallness of the
guilt of recantation are denounced.

392 TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.
ondrs avrdg b Kvqiog cpqai' Tdv dqvovfisvdv fis ivdniov
TWV avdqwnwv, dqvfjaofiat '/dyd airdv ivdniov rov
Harqdg fiov rnv iv rolg oiqavolg. 'AXXd cpyatv 6 dyvqryg'
fjfislg, cpyatv, sofiiv ol dvdqconot, ol di dXXot ndvreg veg '/al '/v-
V6g. Kat 8id TOVTO eine' M-y ^dXyre rovg fiaqyaqirag e'finqnadev
rdv yoiqwv, fiy8E 8drs rd dytov rolg '/vai. (Mat. x. 33; vii. 6.")
Hippol. Bef. Haer. VII. 25. (p. 368.) "Edst t^v vnoXsXeififii-
vyv vldrrjza dno'/aXvcpdfjvat '/at dno'/araaradfjvat avco ixsl vniq
TO fisddqiov nvsvfia nqdg rfjv vldryra rfjv Xsnrofisqy xai fitfiy-
ri'/fjv xat rdv oi'/ 'dvra, dg yiyqanrai, cpyai' xat fj '/riatg airy
avarsvdCst xat avvcodtvet t^v dno'/dXvxptv rcov vlcov
rov Qsov ixdeyofiivy. (Rom. viii. 19, 22.)
Ihid. Mixqt fiiv ovv Mcoaicog and 'Addfi ijiaai-
Xsvasv fj dfiaqria, '/adcog yiyqanrai' i^aaiXsvas ydq b fii
yag dqycov 6 s'ywv rd riXog airov fiiyqi arsqsdfiarog , vofii-
twv avrdg sivai Qsdg fidvog '/at vniq avrdv sivai fiydiv, ndvra
ydq yv cpvXaaad fisva ann'/qvcpcij aiconjj. Tovro, cpqatv, iart rd
fivarfjqtov, b ralg nqnriqatg yevsalg nv/ iyvioqiady, aXXd yv iv
i'/sivoig rolg yqdvoig ^aaiXsvg '/at Kvqiog cog idd'/st riov 'dXcov b
fiiyag dq'/,iov, y nydodg. (Rom. v. 13, 14; Col. i. 26,27.)
Ibid. (p. 370.) 'Enst ovv edet dnn'/aXvcpdfjvai , qiyatv, fjfidg
rd rixva rov Qeov, neqt wv iariva^e, cpqaiv, fj '/riatg '/at
wdivev, dnexSeyofiivrj rfjv ano'/dXvifJiv, yXds rd eiayyiXiov elg
rnv '/dofiov xal difjXde 8td ndayg aq'xfjg xat s^ova lag '/at
¦/vqidryr og '/at navrdg ovd ftarog ovofia^Ofiivov. (Rom.
vui. 22 ; Eph. i. 21.)
Ibid. VII. 26. (p. 372.) Avry iartv fj aocpia iv fivaryqicj)
Xsyofiivy, nsqt ^g, cpyatv, fj yqacpfj Xiysi' oi'/ sv dtda'/rolg
dvdqconivyg aocpiag Xdyoig, dXX' iv 8 i8a'/Tolg nvev
fiarog. (1 Cor. ii. 7, 13.)
Ibid. Kadwg yiyqanrai, cpyat' Kara dno'/dXvxptv iy
vioqiady fiot TO fivanqqiov, '/ai' "Hxovaa d^qyra q'q-
fiara, a ov'/ s^dv dvdqwncp slnslv. (Eph. iii. 3; 2 Cor.
xii. 4.) ^ It is not reasonable to say (Sup. Eel. II, 49) that " the variation in order
is just what one might have expected from the use of the Gospel according to the
Hebrews or a similar work," but uot if Basilides quoted St Matthew, For why?
Do the Fathers quote so carefully? Do even MSS of the Gospels not alter the
order of clauses?

MARCION. 393
Ihid. VIL 27. (p. 374.) "Orav ovv s'Xdy, cpyat, ndaa vlnryg
'/at e'arai vniq rd fieddqinv, rn nveifia, rdre iXeydyaerai fj xri-
aig' ari vet ydq fiiyqt rnv vvv xat ^aaavt'^erai '/at fiivet t^v
dnoxdXvxptv rdv vldv rov Qeov. (Rom. viii. 19,22.)
5. Marcion.^
1. DATE OP MAKCION.
{Contemporary of Justin Martyr.) Justin Apol. I. c. 26.
p. 70 A. Maq'/iwva di nva Hovnxdv, og xat vvv srt iart
• Marcion. See before, Text, pp. 47, 50, 76-81 &c,, and Notes on Marcion at
pp, 75, 76, 77, 154, 162, Marcion's abrupt beginning (see below) gives ground for
suspecting that there had been excision from an original, and further investigation
proves the suspicion to be well founded. The fact that the omissions so often
make the transition abrupt ; the fact (so well brought out by Sanday) that in the
omitted portions the "verified peculiarities of St Luke's style and diction are
found in a proportion averaging considerably raore than one to each verse, " so
that those 309 omitted verses are proved to be by the same writer as those which
Marcion retained ; and the consistent testimony of all the Fathers, give us as com
plete assurance as one can have on any such subject that Marcion's Gospel was
a mutilated Luke, He called it The Gospel — or The Gospel of Christ. He ac
companied it with ten Pauline Epistles which he called to 'ATioaToXixo'v. He
raade fewer changes on the Epistles than on the Gospel, and professed to find
his theology in St Paul, His cardinal principle was that Christ came from the
Good God to overturn the kingdom of the Jewish God ; and his aim was to make
a Gospel which established this principle. His doctrine of the evil of raatter
led him to teach that marriage is ruin. See Hippolyt, Eef Haer, VIII. 16. The
whole text of Marcion's Gospel, as constructed by Hahn from the numerous and
systematic quotations of Tertullian and Epiphanius, and from the more incidental
references of Irenaeus, Origen, the Pseudo-Origen (Dial, de Eecta Fide), and
others, is found in Thilo's Codex Apocryphus, 1832, Hahn's elaborate work has
a permanent value, though some of his conclusions have been overthrown by
more recent investigations. Hilgenfeld in his "Kritische Untersuchungen iiber
die Evangelien Justin's, der Clementinischen Homilien und Marcion's " (1850) has
a list of the omissions in St Luke made by Marcion, Volkmar, in "Das Evan
gelium Marcion's" (1852), has given a full outline of the contents of the Gospel,
In this work Volkmar expanded and defended his earlier articles (Tubing, Zeitsch.
1850), Anger's "Synopsis" contains almost full references to all the passages
altered by Marcion, Eoensch's "Das Neue Test, TertuUians" contains much
interesting discussion. Reference is made below to " Supernatural Eeligion" and
Dr Sanday's "Gospels &c," There is an excellent and suggestive statement in the
Archbishop of York's (Thomson's) "Synoptic Gospels," republished from "The
Speaker's Commentary" in his admirable volume "Word, W^ork and WiU" (1879),
These works and others have been used in compiling the following chapter,
which, it is hoped, contains what the student seeks most to know regarding the
great Gnostic critic. After some general quotations, with a rubric to each show
ing its bearing, a full list is given of Marcion's alterations of Luke's Gospel, with
notes showing upon what principle the alterations were made in each case. This
is a slight departure from the ordinary plan of this work, in which the original
passages are all given. The extraordinary length of the quotations and remarks

394 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
8 i8da'/wv rovg' nsidofiivovg dXXnv nvd vofil^siv fisi^ova
rov 8qfitovqynv Qsov og '/ard 7zdv yivng avt^qdniov 8id T^g twv
datfinvcov avXXijxpscog nnXXnig nsnniy/s (iXaacpyfiiag Xiysiv '/at
aqvsladai rdv noiqrfjv rnvds rov navrdg Qsdv, aXXnv 8e nva, cog
ovza fisi^nva, rd fisitova naqd rnvrnv bfinXoyslv nsnoiy/ivai.
So also Ap. I. c. 58. p. 92 A. "
2. TESTIMONY OF THE FATHEllS TO THE CHARACTER AND
OBJECT OP mahcion's WOBK.
Justin, Apol. I. 26; I. 58 [as above under I.J
Iren. B. L 27. 2. [In Eus. H. E. IV. 11 are the first words
AiaSe^dfievog 8i aizdv Maq'/iwv b Hovri'/dg, y'v^yas rd 8i8aa'/a-
Xslov, dnqqvdqiaafiEvwg ^Xaacpqfiwv.] Succedens autem ei (sc.
Cerdoni) Marcion Ponticus, adampliavit doctrinam, impudorate
blasphemans eum, qui a lege et prophetis annuntiatus est Deus;
malorum factorem et bellorum concupiscentem et inconstantem
quoque sententia, et contrarium sibi ipsum dicens. Jesum autem
ab eo Patre, qui est super mundi fabricatorem Deum, venientem
in Judaeam temporibus Pontii Pilati praesidis, qui fuit procu
rator Tiberii Caesaris, in hominis forma manifestatum his qui in
Judaea erant, dissolventem prophetas et legem et omnia opera
ejus Dei, qui mundum fecit, quem et Cosmocratorem dicit. Et
of Tertullian and Epiphanius makes it impossible to reproduce them all here.
And moreover, in this case the facts are not disputed. It is more important to
collect them than to discuss them.
There are few raore conclusive results attained in Biblical criticism than that
which Volkraar achieved as against Eitschl, Baur, and Schwegler, who had
argued for the priority of Marcion to the canonical Luke, Semler had con
jectured that Marcion perhaps used a shorter Gospel, and Eichhorn had argued
that the canonical Luke was a later edition of Marcion ; but the Tiibingen scholars
made of it a great controversy, Volkmar had the satisfaction of finding his
chief opponents publicly withdraw from their positions in consequence of his
work. Hilgenfeld's independent investigations led him almost at the sarae time
to the sarae conclusions as Volkraar; and he has stated them with characteristic
force and brevity. The author of "Supernatural Eeligion," who in his earlier
editions (as stated in our notes pp, 47 &c., which were printed off before the
publication of his "Complete Edition" 1879) advocated the priority of Marcion
to Luke, has (1879) modified his views, owing to the irresistible linguistic argu
ment of Dr Sanday in his "Gospels in the Second Century," and has made frank
admission of the change. His statement of the case on the other side remains,
however — somewhat inconsistently — and may be consulted with advantage, Dr
Sanday's is the last contribution of importance to the long controversy.
Some of Marcion's various readings — those in V, 14, 39; XII, 14, 38;
XVII. 2; XXI, 27; XXIII, 2, have considerable support in Latin and Syriac ver
sions and in D. See Tisch., Greek Test.; and compare Sanday, p. 231.

MAECION. 395
super haec, id quod est secundum Lucam Evangelium circum
cidens, et omnia quae sunt de generatione Domini conscripta
auferens, et de doctrina sermonum Domini multa auferens, in
quibus manifestissime conditorem hujus universitatis suum Pa
trem confitens Dominus conscriptus est; semetipsum esse vera-
ciorem, quam sunt hi, qui evangelium tradiderunt, apostoh, suasit
discipulis suis; non evangelium, sed particulam evangelii tradens
eis. Similiter autem et apostoli Pauli epistolas abscidit, auferens
quaecumque manifesto dicta sunt ab apostolo de eo Deo, qui
mundum fecit, quoniam hic Pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et
quaecumque ex propheticis memorans apostolus docuit, praenun-
tiantibus adventum Domini. (See also B. IIL 11, 7, 9; before,
pp. 67, 69.)
{Marcion corrupted the Gospels.) Tert. Adv. Marc. I. 1.
Quis tam comesor mus Ponticus quam qui evangelia corrosit?
(Marcion mutilated Scripture : Valentinus explained it away.)
De Praescr. Haeret. cc. 32-38 ; se*e before, pp. 46-49.
(Marcion in his Antitheses, quite distinct from his Gospel,
expounded the New Testament as contradicting the Old.) Tert.
Adv. Marc. 1. 19. Separatio legis et evangelii proprium et principale
opus est Marcionis, nec poterunt negare discipuli ejus quod in
summo instrumento habent, quo denique initiantur et indurantur
in hanc haeresim. Nam hae sunt Antitheses Marcionis, id est
contrariae oppositiones, quae conantur discordiam evangelii cum
lege committere, ut ex diversitate sententiarum utriusque instru
menti diversitatem quoque argumententur deorum. (See also
Adv. Marc. IV. 6; before, p. 81.)
(Marcion contrasted Christ with the Creator.) Tert. Adv.
Marc. II. 29. Compendio interim possum Antitheses retudisse,
gestientes ex qualitatibus ingeniorum sive legum sive virtutum
discernere, atque ita alienare Christum a Creatore, ut optimum
a judice, et mitem a fero, et salutarem ab exitioso.
(Marcion's object was to remove all proof of the Incarnation.)
Tert. De Carne Christi, c. 1. Marcion ut carnem Christi negaret,
negavit etiam nativitatem, aut ut nativitatem negaret, negavit
et carnem, scihcet ne invicem sibi testimonium responderent na
tivitas et caro, quia nec nativitas sine carne, nec caro sine nati
vitate; quasi non eadem licentia haeretica et ipse potuisset aut

396 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
admissa carne nativitatem negare, ut Apelles discipulus et postea
deserter ipsius, aut et carnem et nativitatem confessus aliter il
las interpretari, ut condiscipulus et condesertor ejus Valentinus.
C. 2. His opinor consiliis, tot originalia instrumenta Christi
delere, Marcion, ausus es, ne caro ejus proharetur. Ex quo,
oro te? Exhibe auctoritatem. Si propheta es, praenuntia ali
quid; si apostolus, praedica publico; si apostolicus, cum apostolis
senti; si tantum Christianus es, crede quod traditum est. Si
nihil istorum es, merito dixerim, morere! Nam et mortuus es,
qui non es Christianus, non credendo quod creditum Christianos
facit. Et eo magis mortuus es, quo magis non es Christianus;
qui cum fuisses, excidisti, rescindendo quod retro credidisti, sicut
et ipse confiteris in quadam epistola i, et tui non negant et nostri
probant. Igitur rescindens quod credidisti, jam non credens re-
scidisti; non tamen quia credere desiisti, recte rescidisti, atquin
rescindendo quod credidisti, probas, antequam rescinderes, aliter
fuisse. Quod credidisti aliter, illud ita erat traditum ; porro quod
traditum erat, id erat verum, ut ab eis traditum, quorum fuit
tradere. Ergo quod erat traditum, rescindens, quod erat verum
rescidisti. (Marcion prefixed no author's name to his Gospel.) Tert.
Adv. Marc. IV. 2. Marcion Evangelio, scilicet suo, nullum ascri-
bet auctorem. See before, p. 76. — Bseudo- Origen: Dial, de
recta in Deum fide, sect. I. (Origen, Migne, Vol. I. p. 1728.)
Adamantius: Ttg ianv b yqdxpag rd EvayysXiov rovro, o s'cpyg
sivat sv; Megethius: '0 Xqtarog. A. Airdg b Kvqtog syqaxpsv
"Ort iaravqddyv xat dvsaryv rfj rqirrj fjfisqiji; ovrco yqd
cpst; M. '0 dndaroXog HavXog nqoaidy/ev. A. Haqfjv ydq Hav
Xog EV rip aravqwdfjvat rdv Xqtarov; M. Airdg syqaxpsv rd
EiayysXiov dnXwg.^
Ibid. (p. 1781.) Marcus: Ov Hirqog syqaxpsv, dXX' 6 Xqiardg,
TO EiayyiXiov. (Marcion mutilated Luke's Gospel.) Tert. Adv. Marc. IV. 2.
Lucam videtur Marcion elegisse quem caederet. (See before, for
> See allusions to (apparently the same) epistle of Marcion's: Adv. Marc.
IV. 4 (see before, p. 79); and to Marcion's original beliefs: Dc Praesc. Haer.
c. 3; Adv. Marc. I. 1,
* Megethius and Marcus are Marcionites ; Adamantius is orthodox. This treatise
is ascribed to the fourth century.

MARCION. 397
context p. 76.) Compare Irenaeus, B. III. 12. 12; III. 14. 1. (See
before, p. 161.)
(Marcion and his disciples claimed for this Gospel priority
to Luke's.) Tert. Adv. Marc. IV. 4. (See before, p. 78.)
(Marcion's disciples altered their Gospel to obviate ohjections.)
Tert. Adv. Marc. IV. 5. See before, p. 81. (On the divisions of
the Marcionites comp. Eus. H. E. V. 13.)
(Where Marcion's Gospel began.) Hippol. Ref. Haer. VII. 31.
(p. 396.) Maq'/iwv rfjv yivsaiv rov acorfjqog qfuov navrdnaat
naqyzyaaro, dronov stvat vofii'Qwv vnd rd nXdafia rov dXsdqiov
roirov vsi'/ovg ysyovivat rdv Xdyov rdv ry ipiXia avvaycovitdfis-
vov, rovriart np dyadip, dXXd ycoqtg ysviascog srst nevrs'/aids'/-
drw rfjg yysfioviag Ti^sqiov Kaiaaqog '/arsXyXvddra airdv
dvcodsv, fiiaov dvra xa-zov '/at ayadov, di8da'/Eiv iv ralg aw
ay coy alg. (Luke iii. 1; iv. 31.)
(The Marcionite dogmas regarding human nature.) Ibid. X. 19.
(p. 524.) Maq'/iwv ds 6 Hovrr/dg xat Kiq8wv b roirov 8tdda'/a-
Xog '/at airot bqi^ovatv sivat rqelg rag rov navrdg dqydg, dyaddv,
dixatov, vXyv. . . . Tdv 8i Xqiardv vldv eivat rnv dyadov '/at
vn airoi) nenificpd-at int aioryqiix rdv xpvycov, ov i'aw dvdqw
nov xaXsl, dg dvdqwnov cpavivra Xiycov oi'/ 'dvra dvdqconov, '/at
t5g Evaaqxov oix svaaq'/ov, do'/yast nscpyvdra, cmre yiveaiv vno-
fieivavra o'vre nddog dXXd rip do'/slv. 2dq'/a di ov diXsi dv-
iaraadat, ydfiov di cpdoqdv sivai Xiywv '/vvr/wriqc^ §icjt nqoa-
dysi roig fiadyrdg, iv rovroig vofiit,cov Xvnsiv rdv dqfitovqydv,
sl rdv vn' airov ysyovdrwv 'fj dqia fiivwv dniyntrn.
(Marcionites denied the unity of the Four Gospels.) Origen,
Comment, in Joann. Tom. V. p. 98. (See before, p. 85.)
Ihid. Tom. X. 4. p. 165. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 316.) 'Eyd d' oi
fiai xat TOV Maqxicova naqs'/ds^dfisvov vytslg Xdyovg, ddsrovvra
aizov rfjv i'/ Maqiag yivsaiv, xard rfjv dsiav avrov cpvatv ano-
tpfjvaadai, dg dqa oi'/ sysvvfjdy ex Maqiag, '/at did rovro rsroX-
fiy/ivat nsqtyqdxpai roirovg rovg rdnnvg dnd rov EvayyeXiov.
{The Marcionite Canon.) Epiph. Haer. I. t. 3. h. 42. p. 309.
(Migne, Vol. I. p. 708.)^ 'EXsvaofiat di sig rd in airov ysyqafi-
3 Epiphanius here shows what the Marcionite Canon was composed of; and
intimates that he, like Tertullian, can prove the main Christian verities against
Marcion, even from what Marcion allowed to remain in his "Gospel."

398 TESTIMONIES OP HEEETICS.
fiiva, fidXXov 8i i^qa8iovqyyfiiva. Ovrog ydq s'ysi EiayysXiov
fidvov rd '/azd Aov/dv, nsqi'/sxofifiivov ayro Trg dqyfjg, did tjjv
rov Acorfjqog aiXXyxpiv, xat rfjv svaaq-/ov airov naqnvaiav. Ov
fiovov 8i rfjv aqyfjv dnirsfisv b Xvfiyvdjisvog savrdv ynsq rd Ev
ayyiXiov aXXd '/at rnv riXnvg '/at rdiv ftiacov noXXd nsqii/oips
rdv T^g aXrjdsiag Xdycov dXXa 8i naqd rd yeyqafifiiva nqoari-
der/e. Mdviii 8e '/iyqyrai rovnjj np xoiqoi'/zfjqt np '/ard Aov/dv
EvayysXiqr. "Eysi 8e '/at 'EntaroXdg naq' avnp rov dyiov 'Ano
aroXov dixa, atg fidvaig '/iyqyrai, oi ndat di rolg iv avralg
yeyqafifiivotg, aXXd nva airdv neqirifivcov , nvd di dXXntdraag
'/ecpdXaia. Tavraig 8i ralg 8vat ^i^Xnig '/iyqyrai. "AXXa 8i
avvrdyfiara acp kavrnv avvira^s rolg dn' airnv nXavwfiivnig.
aI 8i EniarnXat al naq' ainp Xsydfisvai slat' nqdry fiiv nqdg
TaXdrag, dsvriqa di nqdg Koqivdiovg, rqiry nqdg Koqivdiovg
devriqa, rerdqry irqdg 'Pwfiainvg, nifinrq nqdg QeaaaXovr/elg,
"xzq nqdg QsaaaXovr/slg dsvriqa, sjiddfiy nqdg 'Ecpsaiovg, oyddrj
nqdg KoXcoaaslg, ivvdry nqdg OiXyfwva, 8s/drq nqdg OtXinny-
aiovg. Eysi di '/at T^g nqdg Aandr/siag Xsynfiivyg fiiqq. 'E§
ovneq yaqa'/rijqog rov naq avrnv acotofiivov, rov rs EvayysXiov,
'/at TWV intaroXcov rov AnoardXov, dsl^at avrdv iv Qsip s'yofisv
anarsdjva xat nsnXavqfiivov, '/at axqdrara dieXiy^ai. E^ avrdiv
ydq avaficpi^dXwg rdv naq avrov bfioXoyovfiivwv dvarqanyasrat.
E/' ydq riov airdv srt naq avzov Xetxpdvwv , zov re EvayyeXiov
'/at nov 'EniaroXdrv evqiaxofiivwv , deiydfjaerat b Xqiardg rolg
awerolg fifj dXXdrqtog eivat 8iadfj/yg, '/at ol nqocpyrai ovv ov/
dXXdrqiot 'dvreg rfjg roi Kvqiov ivdqfiiag, '/.r.X.
(How Epiphanius set to work) Ibid. p. 310. Haqadyaofiat
8i '/at yv inoiyadfiqv '/ar avroi) nqayfiareiav , nqtv rov rav-
'zrjv fiov TJJV avvra^iv ianovda'/ivai did Tr^g vfidv twv aSsX-
cpcov nqnrqonfjg nniyaaadat. And iriov l/avdv avsqsvviov rrjv
rovrov rov Maq'/iwvog inivsvoyfiivyv ipsvdyyoqiav , '/at Xqqw8q
didaa'/aXtav, airdg dfj rdg rov nqosiqyfiivov ^i^Xovg, ag '/i'/rq-
rat fisrd yslqag Xa^urv, rd rs naq' airiov Xsydfisvov EvayyiXiov,
'/at dnoaroXi'/dv '/aXovfisvov naq' ainp i^avdiadfisvog, '/at ava-
Xs^dfisvog Yt.ad' e'lqjidv dnd twv nqoeiqyfiivwv dio §i^Xiwv rd
iXiy^ai airdv dvvdfisva, iddcptdv n awrd^swg inotyadfiyv, dxo
Xoidwg rd^ag '/ecpdXaia, xat iniyqdxpag s'/dary qfjast, nqcoryv,
dtviiqav, Tijizqv. Kal o'vrwg 'icog rsXovg 8ie§yXdov, iv oig cpai-

MARCION. 399
vsrai yXidiwg xad savrov int ravrag rdg naqufistvdaag rnv rs
^wryqog '/at rov Anoan'Xnv Xi^sig cpvXdrrcov. Al fiiv ydq ai
riov naqyXXayfiivcog ''vn avrnv i^qtt8iovqyrjdyaav, xat wg ovx srys
np '/ard Anv/dv EiayyeXIcj) rd dvriyqacpov, ovre y rov dnoazo-
Xf/ov yaqa'/rfjqog sficpaaig ' .dXXa 8i cpiast c'og s'ysi xat to Eiay-
yiXtnv xat b 'AnoaroXog, fifj dXXayivra in avrov, dvvdfisva 8s
avrdv 8isXiyyeiv, 8t' wv 8si'/vvTai HaXaid Jiadfj/y avficpiovovaa
nqdg t^v Niav, '/at fj Katvy riqdg t^v HaXatdv //tady/yv. "AX
Xai di ndXiv Xi^stg rdiv airdv ^i^Xiwv vnocpaivnvai Xqtardv iv
aaq'/t iXyXvdivat, '/ai iv fjfilv rsXs'iwg ivyvdqwnyxivai. AXXd
'/at dXXat ndXiv bfinXnyovaat rfjv rdv vs'/qiov dvdaraaiv, '/at rdv
Qeov sva 'dvra Kvqiov ndvrwv navro'/qdroqa, airdv noirjzqv oi
qavov '/at yfjg, xat ndvnov riov E7tt 'yqg ysvofiivwv, '/at ovrs
naqayaqdaaovaai rov EvayysXiov rqv '/Xfjaiv, nvrs fiyv dqvovfie-
vai rdv notrjzfjv '/at dqfiiovqydv twv ndvrwv, dXXd dyXovaai rdv
aacpdg cofioXoyqfiivov vnd roi "yaqa'/ryqog rov anoa znXi/nv '/at
rov svayysXi~/ov '/yqiyfiarog. Kat san rd fjfilv nsnqayfiazsv-
fiiva iv vno'/Eifiivoig naqandifieva, drivd iart rdde.
Ibid. p. 311. "Ozci) cpiXov iazi rdg rov dnaryXov Maq'/iwvng
vddovg intvoiag d'/qi^ovv, xat rdg ininXdazovg zov airov §oa'/y-
fiarog firjyavdg 8iayivcoa'/eiv , rovnoi np avXXeXeyfiivco novyfian
ivrvyslv fifj xaro'/vsirw. 'E'/ ydq rov naq' avrofj EvayysXiov rd
nqdg dvri^qyatv rfjg navovqyov avzov qadiovqyiag anovddaavzsg
naqsdifisda ' 'iv' ol rip novyfian ivrvyslv idiXovrsg, sywat roiro
yvfivdatov d^vryrog nqdg i'Xeyynv rdrv in avrov intvsvoyfiiviov
^svoXs^idv. Philastrius de haeres. Marcion secundum Lucam Evange-
hum solum accipit . . . quae enim de Christo dicunt Scripturae,
ut de Deo vero, praeterit, quae autem quasi de homine dicunt,
accipit capitula.
Theodoreti haeret. fdbul. I. 24. Airdg di Maq'/iwv i'x fiiv
rdv E'iayyeXicov rd xard Aovxdv idivaro fidvnv, rfjv ysvsaXoyiav
nsqt'/dxpag rd nXslara.

400 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
3. CONTENTS OE MAECIOn's GOSPEL. (See note on p. 390.)
Luke I. II. omitted entirely.
[Marcion did not find that the Preface suited his purpose. He did not
admit that John was the forerunner of the true Christ, but regarded him
as representing the God of the Old Testament. All reference to his mir
aculous birth was therefore expunged. He retained v. 33; vii. 18, &c. ;
ix. 7, 19; xi. 1; xx. 4-6. But all these can be explained in conformity
with his principles. The Birth and Nativity of our Lord were not allowed
to remain on the record, because Marcion could not admit that Christ came
in the flesh.]
III. 1, combined with IV. 31, made the opening words of Mar
cion's Gospel:
'Ev srst nEvrsxai8s'/dni} rfjg fjysfioviag Tt^sqiov Kaiaaqog
[fjysftovsvovrng Hovriov HiXdrov r-qg 'lovdaiag] 6 0£og '/az-
yXdev elg Kacpaqvaovfi, ndXtv T^g laXiXaiag, xat rjv didd-
O'/wv iv rolg ad§^aat.
[The words in brackets are added on the testimony of the Pseudo-Origen,
Dial, de recta fide, Sect. II, 823 B, Migne, p. 1765 (iiA Ttov fj;>6-iisii IIi-
XaTO\j). All the authorities agree that Marcion's Gospel began with Luke
iii, 1, and it appears that he added the words of iv, 31 so as to make it
appear that Christ descended from heaven to the synagogue of Capernaum,
KaTiiJXliev has therefore a very different meaning frora that which Luke
gives it. There is doubt as to the nominative to xaTT^XSEV, Tertullian says
proponit Deum descendisse. Epiphanius has his usual xa\ Ta E'ii; without
being definite. Hahn has o' ©co;, Volkmar o 'Iiqaou?,]
HI. 1-38 omitted. (See Epiph. Haer. 42. § 11. p. 312. Migne,
p. 711.) [Marcion could take no cognisance of the Baptist's preaching, nor could
he admit that Christ was baptized by an O, T. prophet : vv, 20-22 had no
meaning for Marcion,]
IV. 1-13 omitted. (See Epiph. Haer. 42. Ref. 60. p. 343. Migne,
p. 760.) [The Temptation would have been an empty formality in Marcion's view
(Hilg.), also too like Israel in the wilderness (Baur), and Christ did not
come to fulfil the Old Testament,]
IV. 14. 15 omitted.
16. ov yv Tsdqafifiivog omitted.
17-19 omitted, vv. 20, 21, may have been retained.
[These verses omitted because fulfilling Isaiah Ixi, 1. 2.]
22. xat s'Xsyov oiy ovrdg ianv b vldg ' Iwayip omitted.
23. iv TJJ nazqidi aov omitted.

MAECIOn's gospel. 401
Luke TV. 24. omitted.
27. probably omitted.
34. Nal^aqyvi omitted.
[Christ would be of the earth if " Nazarene " were retained. Marcion
omitted all mention of N. as Christ's birthplace. Compare Luke xviii, 37,
xxiv, 19, Epiphanius does not say that the word was omitted in those cases,
but Tert, Adv, Marcion (IV, 8) seems to say so. The Pseudo-Origen (Dial.
de recta fide, p. 858 C; Migne, p. 1852) distinctly says so, Na^upoio; might
not be in Marcion's opinion the same as Na^ap-qvo'; , but he seems to have
expunged both, and Tert, (IV, 8) regards tbem as the same — a native of
Nazareth,] Marcion opened his narrative in the following order:
IH. 1 combined with IV. 31. Then came IV. 32-39. 16 (cur
tailed) [20, 21] (?) 22 (curtailed). 23, [27] (??) 28, 29,
30, 40-44.
[There is not absolute agreement as to the exact words with which Mar
cion's excisions in this chapter began and ended,]
V. 14. Vfilv for airolg.
[Not a mere variation (Hilg,), but to draw more emphatically the line
between Christ and the servants of the Demiurge to whom the healed per
son belonged (Volkmar), Tert. IV. 9 says, Ut sit vobis in testimonium. So
Epiph. Haer. 42. § 11. p, 312, '''Iva t) (jLaprupiov toCto up,tv. In Cod, D
the reading is "Iva di JiapTupiov T] u[ji,Ev touto : Ut sit in testimonium vobis
hoc. See Sanday, Gospels in Second Century, p, 231, for other codd. Some
of the pernicious readings with which Epiph, p. 312 charges Marcion are
merely variations in the order of words, as in V, 28, &c.]
V. 39. omitted (probably).
[The omission of the early chapters makes the introduction of John in
V. 33 abrupt, and Tert, (IV. 11) does not fail to say that Marcion makes
John appear as suddenly as Christ,]
VI. 17. iv airolg for fisr' airdv. See Epiph. p. 312. (Migne,
Vol. L p. 712.)
23. Vfidv for airdv (Epiph.), but Tert. reads eorum (airdv).
VIL 31-35. [The author of Supernatural Eeligion had a discussion of this passage
beginning, " It is generally agreed that the verses Luke vii. 29-35 were
wanting in Marcion's Gospel," In his "Complete Edition" he has altered
this into, "Some critics believe that the verses Luke vii. 29-35 were wanting
in Marcion's Gospel. " But his note is not clear, and the discussion in his
text remains. It may therefore he well to say that Tertullian found noth
ing to remark upon in the verses, and therefore passed them by, Epipha
nius is silent because Marcion's Gospel did not omit them, Volkmar and
26

402 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
Hilgenfeld believe that Marcion's Gospel contained them. The critics who
omit the verses are therefore Hahn, who founds on tbe silence of Tertul
lian, and (a mistake as to) the bearing of Marcion's system; and Eitschl,
who would omit 29, 30 as well as 31-35, because he does not think them
properly connected with the context.]
Luke VIII. 19. omitted.
21. Inserted: Tig fiov fj ftfjuyq '/at ol d8sXcpoi;
[By leaving out verse 19 Marcion got rid of the Evangelist's statement:
"There came to Him His mother and His brethren;" and the other verses
thereafter witness in favour of Marcion's systera. To raake this witness
more clear, he inserted frora Matthew or Mark : " Who are my mother and
ray brethren?" This is an illustration of what Marcion did when alteration
served his purpose better than simple omission. (See Hilg. p, 451.) It
appears that the allegation of the Heretics was that Temptandi gratia nun-
tiave7-ant ei matrem et fratres, quos non habebat. (Tert, De Carne Christi,
c. 7.) Tertullian in that passage and in Adv, Marc. IV. 19 says that this
question, "VFho are my mother,?" &c. was the most constant argument of
Marcion, and of "all" who denied the Incarnation.]
IX. 40. Epiphanius (Sch. 19) notes some change obscurely.
X. 4. Marcion perhaps read qd^8ov. (Hilg.)
21. Marcion omitted '/at rfjg yfjg.
[He could not retain an expression which called the Father of Christ
"Lord of earth." In XII. 22-31 he retains the care of this world under
the Creator; but in the present passage Christ was addressing His God,
and Marcion omitted the phrase connecting that God with the earth]
22. Marcion changed the order and had the Aorist, his text
being apparently: Oi8stg s'yvw rig sartv b narfjq, el fifj 6
vldg, '/at rig ianv b vldg, sl ftfj 6 naryq, xat cp idv, x.r.X.
[This reading depends mainly on Irenaeus, B. IV. 6. 1, Nemo cognovit
Patrem, nisi Mli-us, nec Mlium, nisi Pater et cui voluerit Filius revelare.
Irenaeus shows that it was not only the Marcionite, but a common Gnostic,
reading; obviously because the Aorist permitted (if it did not suggest) an
Anti-Old-Testament meaning, as though the True God had not been known
before the coming of Christ. The Aorist however was coramon enough
among orthodox Fathers. See before, notes on Justin, pp. 60, 118, See
full list in Anger's Synopsis in loc, Pseudo-Origen, Dial, de recta fide,
p, 817, has ouSeU Syvu tov tc. . ouSi tov ulo'v ti; yivojcrxct . . .
which is the most consistent reading from Marcion's point of view,]
25. omitted alwvtov.
[Marcion oould not admit any connection between the Law of the O. T,
and Eternal Life. In c. XVIII, 18 the word oioivtov is retained, but in that
case the insufficiency of the commandments is shown,]
XI. 2. Instead of 'Ayiaadyrw rd 'dvofid aov, Marcion read 'EX-
dsrw rd dytov nvsifid aov icp' fjfidg.

MAECION'S GOSPEL. 403
[This rests on Tert, Adv, Marc. IV, 26, and is not quite clear, Tisch.
argues (see Gr, Test, in loc) that Marcion really read ayioaSriTO), x,T.X.
Greg. Nyss. has ^XSe'tw to ay. m. — The author of Sup, Eel. II, 126 says
that this "is recognized to be the true original reading"!]
29-32. Omitted sl fiy rd ayfislov 'Iwvd — to nXslnv 'Iwvd wds,
vv. 29-32.
[Marcion did not admit of any comparison between Christ and men of
the other and inferior religion. See below, note on XI, 49-51,]
42. Marcion read '/Xfjaiv for xqiaiv.
[It appears that Marcion did not wish to connect Judgment with the
Good God. Tertullian's argument on the passage does not seem to make
xVi^oiv = hospitality (as it is sometimes translated in this case), but con
nects vocationem with dilectionem Dei (IV, 27), so as to make it appear that
it means calling, calling by God, His argument is that Christ says nothing
against the Law, but denounces those who misunderstood it: further, that
what Marcion retains regarding Christ is the same as the 0. T, revelation
of God ; ascribing to him the function of judging (condemning), and caring
for both external and internal conduct. See XVI. 19-31, Marcion inter
preted the passage as referring to the Creator's Hell, and supposed y. 29
to be spoken of the Jews only. See Epiph, Sch, et Eef. 44-46,]
49-51. omitted.
[Marcion could not put the prophets of the O. T. and the apostles of
the N, T. on the same footing, as in this passage. So(pia tou ©£oO was
ascribed to the 0, T, The wonder is that he retained so much of this
section of S. Luke. He has elsewhere retained quotations from the O. T.
like VI, 3 (mere dialectic in his opinion) ; VII, 27 (merely the Baptist as
forerunner of Christ whom the Demiurge would send); XX, 41-44 — like
XX, 4 — (merely an appeal to embarrass the Jews), (See Hilg, p. 452.)]
XII. 6 (7?). omitted.
[Tertullian passes by those words (IV, 28), Epiphanius, Sch, 29, says
that Marcion omitted v, 6 ; but he makes no mention of v, 7, The verses
seem to stand or fall together, Marcion would ascribe v, 5 to the Demiurge
into whose hands would fall all unbelievers in Christ, V. 6 (and in some
measure v, 7) raust have seemed to him to confuse the spheres of Christ
and the Creator,]
8. 9. ivdniov rov Qeov instead of ivdniov rdv dyyiXwv rov
Qsov. [See below, on XV, 10.]
10. omitted 'y fieqiaryv. (Tert. IV. 28.)
28. omitted (Epiph.), not omitted (Tertullian).
[It is possible that the Marcionites had omitted those words before Epi
phanius wrote, though Marcion himself had not.] 26*

404 TESTIMONIES OP HEEETICS.
Luke XII. 32. vjidv omitted. See Epiph. Sch. 34.
38. Tjj sansqivy cpvXaxfj instead of ev rfj 8EVTsqci cpvXaxjj xat
iv TJJ rqiry cpvXa'/jj. See Epiph. Sch. 35.
[Epiphanius says o' XTVjvoiSifi; forgets that watches are aU, during the
night, and that there is no evening one. But the first of the night Watches
might be called the evening watch,]
XIII. 1-5; 6-9 omitted.
[Epiphanius is somewhat ambiguous, as it is uncertain whether the pa
rable of the fig-tree is included in the omission, Tertullian (c, 30) passes
direct frora XII, 59 to XIII, 10, Hilgenfeld only omits vv, 1-5 ; but Hahn,
Volkmar and Anger omit also 6-9,]
28. Marcion read: "Ors ndvrag rovg 8ixaiovg 't'8yTs iv rfj
^aaiXsia rov Qeov, vjidg 8i ix^aXXofisvovg '/at '/qarovfii-
vovg s'^w' i'/sl sarat 6 '/Xavdfidg, '/at b ^qvyjidg rdv oddv-
Twv. Epiph. Sch. 40.
29-35. omitted.
[Verses 29, 30 show that it is the same God as in the O, T, who now
puts the heathen iu the place of the Jews, Verses 31-35 represent Christ
as the God and the Messiah of the Jews, Ritschl and Baur regarded the
omission of the whole as a proof of the originality of Marcion's Gospel]
XIV. 26. xaraXsinet instead of fitael.
XV. 10. svconiov rov Qsov instead of iv. rdv dyyiXwv roi Qsov.
[Marcion understood this of the Lord God. Tertullian (c, 32) teaches that
it must refer to the Creator, the Sarae who long ago proclaimed His long
ing that the sinner should not die but repent.]
11-32. The Prodigal Son. Omitted.
[This was oraitted because of representing the Supreme God as in the
same relation of Father to both Jews and heathen. It was not because of
his repugnance to feasting that Marcion omitted the parable. He retains
some non-ascetic passages, as the Bridegroom, V. 34 ; the wadding, XII.
36; XIV, 8; the heavenly feast, XIV. 15-24. See Hilg. p. 454; Volkmar
p. 66,]
XVI. 12. Marcion read sfidv for vfiirsqov. (Tert. c. 33.)
['Ev T(p aXXoTpiw referred to the Demiurge's goods : to ^fio'v brought in
the contrast of Christ's,]
17. Marcion altered 'y rov vdfiov.
["H TCOV Xo'yuv (iou instead of tJ tou vojjiou (so Ritschl, Volkmar, Hil
genfeld). They rest on Tertullian, But Tertullian is uncertain. He says
(c. 33) in one place: Transeat igitur coely,m et terra citius, sicut et lex et
prophetae, quam unus apex verbo-rum Domini. But again he says: Ideo suh-
teamit facilius elementa transitura quam verba sua. Epiphanius passes it by

MAECIOn's GOSPEL. 405
.and comments on V, 16, Hahn renders Tertullian into Greek, . . . TtapeX-
Ssfv, m xal o" voVo; xal ol TtpocpY]Tai, i] tuv Xoyuv tou Kuptou .utav xe-
patav Tceuerv. So also Anger,]
XVII. 2. el ovx iyswydy added. Tert. IV. 35.
10. omitted. Epiph. Sch. 47.
[Hahn omits 7-10 mainly on the ground of the silence of Tertullian,
but partly also because of Marcion's asceticism, to which feasting was re
pugnant. As regards the latter ground see before, note on XV, 11-32; and
Tertullian's silence is not enough to cause the omission,]
14. Epiphanius says, Sch. 48 : "Ors awyvryaav ol di'/a Xsnqoi.
Anixoxps di noXXd xat inoiyasv 'AnsarstXsv airovg,
Xsywv Jsi^ars savroig rolg Isqsvai' '/at dXXa dvr'
aXXwv inoiyas, Xiywv, oti HoXXot Xenqot yaav iv fjfiiqatg
EXiaaaiov rov nqocpytov, '/at oix sxadaqiady si fifj Neefidv
6 2iqog. [That is to say, Marcion introduced here Luke iv, 27, Epiphanius twits
Marcion with making a quotation in which the Lord calls Elisha a prophet.
Hilgenfeld reads the passage thus: Kal i6uv eIkev auTor?- IIoXXol Xeupol
i^aav ^v tiVe'patc; . . o" Su'po; (iv, 27.) TCopsuS^vTe; dTttSef^aTE eauTou; Tot;
lepeuai. This is better than Hahn's which is v. 14; iv. 27; vv. 15, 16,
17, &c. Tertullian (c, 35) seems to say that nothing essential was wanting
in Marcion's text.]
XVIII. 19. My fie Xsys dyaddv Elg ianv dyaddg, 6 ©eog 6
naryq. [Marcion added o TCaTTJp to distinguish the Supreme God from the De
miurge, who, though God, was not Father, See on the reading Mil (xe \iyi,
x,T.X, before, p. 116, Notes 6, 7.]
31-34. omitted. Epiph. Sch. 52.
[Omitted, as Marcion could not admit that Christ's death fulfilled O. T,
prophecy. In the same way xxii. 35-38, and xxiv. 25, 27, 32, 44, 45
were omitted. On the other hand Marcion retained, vii. 27, &c., because he
identified John the Baptist with the rule of the Demiurge, and could there
fore admit that Malachi, an O. T, prophet, preincted his coming. Marcion
also retained i. 25; xi. 42; v. 34, there being in each case no identification
of Christ with the Law.]
37. Marcion omitted Na'Qwqalog. See before, on IV. 34.
XIX. 9. Marcion omitted (apparently) xaddrt xat airdg vldg
'A^qadfi iartv. So Tert. c. 37. Epiph. is silent.
29-46. Epiph. Sch. 53.
[Epiphanius says that the omission was to areiiXatov Xif)aTti)v. Tert. (c. 37)
is silent as to the whole of the chapter after v. 27. Hilgenfeld and Volk
mar omit also vv, 47, 48.]

406 TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.
Luke XX. l(/?)-18. omitted.
[Epiphanius is obscure, but it appears as though Marcion read v, 1 :
'Eyi'vETo i-i jjLta tuv TQ,u.spuv SiSaaxovTo; auTou ^v tu hpiZ , ^^iJTfioav iKi-
paXeiv iK auTov Ta; X^'^P°"J '"'^ £9opif)3if)aav ; thus connecting v. 1(a) with
V, 19(a), He must have omitted also v, 19(p), fyvuaav yap . . elitoV, as
depending on what went before,
19(|S). omitted. See last note.
35. Reference to Resurrection omitted.
[Hilgenfeld (so also Eitschl) reads as Marcion's text : ol Se xaTaliuSevTe;
UKO Toij 0eou ToC oEuvo; £x£(vou Tuxefv. Volkmar agrees with this.
Tert. c. 38 reads : Cjuos atitem dignatus est Deus illius aevu Hahn renders
this more literally, Ou; Se xaTT)?(u5Ev o' 0Eo; tou aiuvo; £x£!vou, x,T.X.]
37. 38. omitted.
[The doctrine bearing on the 0. T, was displeasing to Marcion, Epi
phanius (Ref 56, 57) puts this parable beside that of Lazarus (Eef. 52),
and speaks of it as "a repetition" of the same doctrine]
XXI. (18.) 21. 22. omitted. See Epiph. Sch. 58. 59.
[These verses show an interest in Jerusalem and the Jews, which Mar
cion could not endure.]
27. ;H£Ta noXXfjg dvvdfiecog \xat 8d^yg']. (Tert. IV. 39.)
36. omitted Kat aradyvai ejinqoadev rov vlov rofj dvdqconov.
[Tert, (c. 39) quotes other verses but omits this, resuming at v, 37.]
XXII. 3. omitted.
[Tert. V, 6 says : Scriptum est enim apud me Satanam in Judam introisse,
which can only mean that in Marcion's Gospel this incident was omitted.
See also Epiph. Sch. 60, with which this conclusion is' at least not incon
sistent, Marcion's theory that Christ was opposed to the Creator made it
difficult for him to find a place for Satan as the Tempter.]
16. 17. 18. 30 (?). omitted.
[There is much difficulty in accounting for, or even enumerating, Mar
cion's omissions. He certainly retained the direction to Peter to prepare
the Passover, — Epiph. Sch, 61, He also retained v, 15, Epiph. Sch. and
Eef 62, And the mere fact of his leaving that verse in sucb a position
shows that Luke's was the original text which he mutilated. (Hilg. p, 472.)
But it is not certain whether he omitted vv, 17. 18. It seems most likely
that he omitted the whole 16-18, in order to leave no trace of the con
nection between the O. T. feast and the Institution of the Lord's Supper.
W^hat was left therefore pointed to an act of remerabrance (v. 19) in which
was no trace of bodily communion, Jesus took the Bread — a mere syrabol
of the Body which was itself a semblance — and said, "Do this in' remera
brance of me, " He probably omitted v, 30 also, lest it should point to
carnal views of His Kingdom, ^Seg however Hilgenf. p. 433.) All this

MAECIOn's gospel. 407
seems the raost probable account of Marcion's proceedings. But it leaves
the reference to "this Passover" in v, 15 as unaccountable as Epiphanius
(Eef. 62) says it is. By leaving it, Marcion really undid all his undoing;
and the Christian Sacraraent remains connected with the Jewish Passover.
Epiphanius does not say (Sch, 63) that Marcion omitted more than v, 16, but
his reasoning (Eef 63) shows that the oraission went on to the end of v, 18,
I'va Sfj^EV ij.-fj TCO'Trfaif) £v ti] paaiXeia tou ©eou Ppura i] kotol.]
35-38. omitted.
[The reference to 0. T, prophecy caused the omission, Epiph. Sch, 64
does not define the close of tbe oraission, saying raerely xal Ta hi,-i]i. But
V, 38 was too like the Jewish Messiah to be adraitted. See Volkmar, p, 69,]
49-51. omitted.
[Epiphanius argues that Marcion was anxious for Peter's honour, and
obscured the Saviour's, Epiphanius seems to forget that the Synoptists do
not say Peter was the disciple. The motive of the omission is not clear.
See Volkmar, p. 70, Hilg. p. 457.]
XXIII. 2. Marcion read: Tovrov evqoj.iev 8iaarqicpovra rd edvog,
\_xat '/araXiovra rdv vdfiov xat rovg nqocpyrag^ '/at xsXsvovra
cpdqovg ftfj dovvai [xat dvaarqicpovra rdg yvvalxag xat Ta
T£xva], where the passages in brackets are additions to the
text. They are found in some Latin MSS. (See Sanday,
'Gospels in Second Century,' p. 232.)
34. The conclusion of the verse from dtafisqiCdfisvoi was want
ing in Tertullian's copy of the Marcionite Gospel, but re
mained in Epiphanius^s copy.
43. omitted. (Epiph. Sch. 72.)
[Marcion's reason for omitting it is uncertain, Marcion retained the
parable XVI, 19-31 as referring to the Creator's Hades, in which there
were different grades of suffering; but he did not allow that Christ went
there. The Marcionite in Dial, de recta fide p. 827 C, says that Abraham
was in Hades but not in the Kingdom of Heaven, See Hilg. p. 469, Volk
mar p, 100, for notes showing utter perplexity. But Marcion probably did
not wisb to identify the future of the Divine Christ with that of this hu
man believer.]
XXIV. 25. Marcion read if' otg sXdXyasv [iXdXyaa (by mistake
in Epiph.)] vfiiv instead of iXdXyaav ol nqoqffjzai. See Tert.
IV. 43.
25 to 49. Shortened and changed.
[Probably 27, 32, 44(P)-46(a) were omitted; v. 47 was retained to gSvY);
47 (p to 53) omitted. It appears as though both Tertullian and Epiphanius
were tired noting the raany variations, and became remiss at the end of

408 TESTIMONIES OP HEEETICS.
their work on Marcion's Gospel. It appears certain that he retained vv. 37
to 39. Both Tertullian and Epiphanius show how inconsistent with Mar
cion's central position of the unreality of Christ's body this passage is ;
unless indeed (as Tertullian suggests) he interpreted v. 39 to mean that if
they looked at Christ (it seems that Marcion oraitted ijjTqXaqjYJaaTe) they
would see that He was a spirit without flesh and bones. But what of v. 41,
which seems to have been retained? Irenaeus (B. III. 14. 3, 4) distinctly
says that both Marcion and Valentinus retain "all the things which He said
after the resurrection to His disciples on the way, and how they knew Him
in the breaking of bread, " He adds, naturally enough, that they raust
either accept more of the Gospel when they retain so much, or give up
even what they have, Hilgenfeld says, Marcion omitted v, 27 wholly, the
close of V, 32, and omitted, or at least much shortened, vv. 44, 45, Volk
mar's list is 27, 32 (close), 44 (partly), 45, 46 (partly). It appears from
Tertullian's closing words that, according to Marcion, Christ commanded the
disciples to preach to all nations; and Epiphanius (Haer, 42 C. 9. p, 305,
Migne, Vol, I. p, 708) says that Marcion cut off the close of the Gospel as
well as its beginning. We conclude therefore that his Gospel ended with a
paragraph made up, as above, from 44(P)-47(a) and that its last word was
If^VY). Tertullian's characteristic conclusion is : Misereor tui, Marcion :
frustra laborasti. Oh-ristus enim Jesus in Evangelio tuo meus est. Tert. Adv.
Marc. IV. 43,] Marcion and The Epistles.
Irenaeus, Haer. B. I. 27. 2. (See before, p. 391, and com
pare Iren. Haer. IH. 12. 12.)
Tert. Adv. Ma/rc. Vf. 3. (See before, p. 78.)
Epiph. Haer. 42. (See before, p. 394.)
Tert. Adv. Ma/rc. V. 1. Quod idcirco praestruximus, ut jam
hinc profiteamur nos proinde probaturos nullum alium Deum ab
Apostolo circulatum, sicut probavimus nec a Christo, ex ipsius
utique Epistolis Pauli, quas proinde mutilatas etiam de numero
forma jam haeretici evangelii praejudicasse debebit.
Epiph. Haeres. I. t. 3. h. 42. p. 317. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 720.)
'^Tt di '/at raira awdnrofisv. Kard rov nqosiqyfiivov alqsaidqyov
rairy rfj fjficov '/ar airoi nsnqay fiarsvfiivy ayiast' drtva naq'
ainp jidXtv icpsiqofisv, dg iv EdsXodo'/fjasi rcov roi AnoardXov
HaiXov 'EntaroXiov, oiy oXwv, dXX' iviwv, wv iv np riXst rfjg
ndayg nqayfiarsiag al dvofiaaiai vcp' fjfidv ivsrdydyaav, wg naq'
avrip rd 'AnoaroXixdv ificpiqsrai. Kat airUy di y/qoryqiaa fii
vwv awfjdwg TJJ airov ^a8Lovqyic^' dg xat ev np nqoraydivzi

MARCION. 409
ovofian EvayysXici) Xsixpava fiiv rov dXydtvoi EiayysXiov, sl dsl
raXydfj Xiysiv bfiwg di rd ndvra detvwg fiyyavevadfievog ivd-
devaev. Ibid. p. 321. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 726.) Avry y vsvodsvfiivq rnv
Maq'/iwvog awra^ig, syovaa fiiv yaqaxryqa '/at rvnov rov '/ard
Aovxdv EvayysXiov, '/at HaiXov rov 'AnoardXov niy 'dXnv, ni na-
adv rcov avrov EntaroXdv, dXXd fidvov rfjg nqdg 'Pwfiaiovg, '/at
rfjg nqdg Ecpsaiovg, '/at nqdg KoXoaaslg, '/at rfjg nqdg Aaodi'/slg,
'/at dnd rfjg nqdg laXdrag, '/at T^g nqng Koqivdiovg nqdryg xat
dsxniqag, xat rfjg nqdg QsaaaXovi'/slg nqdrqg '/at devriqag, xat
T^g nqdg (DiX-yfiova, xat OiXmnqaiovg, '/at T^g nqdg Tifiddsov
nqcorrjg '/at dsvriqag, '/at nqdg Tirnv, xai T^g Tt^og 'E^qainvg twv
ificpsqn fiivwv naq' airip, dg oi nXyqsardrwv oiawv, dXXd dg sv
naqayaqd^si. Havrayddsv di rfjv avrfjv aivra^tv i^qadtovqyy-
fiivyv, xat sv nat Xi^saiv ininotfjzwg nqodfj/yv s'yovaav, oi'/ sig
wcpiXeiav, dXXd elg yaaovag xat ini^Xa^elg ^svoXs^iag '/ard rfjg
vyiovg niarswg, ix rov airov ifi^s^qovryfiivov roi ^oa'/yfiarog.^
MARCION'S APOSTOLICON.
[Marcion's changes on the Ten Pauline Epistles in his Apostolicon may be
thus represented.
Galatians I. 1, Kol ©sou IlaTpi}; omitted (Jerome), And apparently EauTo'v for
auTo'v-
7, KaTa TO Euayy^Xto'v [j,ou inserted after aXXo. Ei; ETSpov EuayyoXtov tou
XpioTou after p,eTaaTp£4'0"i instead of to EuayyEXtov tou Xpiorou, Dial.
de recta fide p. 9. (This, however, raay not have been by Marcion,
though quoted by a Marcionite,)
III, 6-9. 14. 16-18 omitted (?).
(Tert. Adv, Marc, V. 3, says on v. 26 — Sed et cum adjicit: Omnes
enim filii estis fidei, ostenditur quid supra haeretica industria eraserit,
mentionem scilicet Abrahae, qua nos apostolus filios Abi-ahae per fidem
affirmat, secundum quam mentionem hic quoque filios fidei notavit. It
seems frora this as if all mention of Abraham were omitted, Lardner
(IV. 619) conjectures that Marc, omitted from III. 14 to IV. 3 ; so as to
1 This is a mistake, as Epiphanius (see before, p. 394) and others tell us that
Marcion had only Ten Epistles in his 'AtcootoXixo'v, This list is also curious in
enuraerating both Ephesians and Laodiceans, It is possible that in Tertullian's
tirae Ephesians was in Marcion's Canon as ' Laodiceans ; ' while in the later days
of Epiphanius, there were sorae fragments added to the Apostolicon called ' Lao
diceans. ' As appears in the text, below, Tertullian did not find some of the
Epistles in Marcion's book so completely corrupted as Epiphanius found them.

410 TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.
read : " Brethren, I speak after the manner of men — when we were yet
children," &c. Tert, reads this in Adv, Marc, IV, 1 ; but the quotation
from III, 26 makes Lardner's supposition untenable, Marcion may
have repeated "when we were yet children" at IV, 3,)
V. 9, SoXoi for Jufjiof, Epiph. Sch. 4 (on Gal.) p. 351, (Migne, Vol. I,
p, 776.)
1 Corinthians. IX. 8, EZ xal o' vo'(j.o; Muuas'u; TauTa ou Xe'yei for Kal o" v6-
fio; TaiJTa ou Xe'ysi. Epiph. p, 321, (Migne p, 721.) (Epiph. says
afterwards (Sch, 7 and 16, p 355) that the change was the insertion of
Muuo^u; in the next clause, £v TU vo'fiu,)
X. 9, XptOTo'v for Kuptov. Ibid. p. 358. (Migne p, 788,) (This is the read
ing in many old MSS.)
19. IspoSuTov for eESuXoSutov- Ibid,
XIV. 19. 6ia TOV vonov for tu vof fxou. Ibid, p, 361, (Migne p. 792.)
[Note. In 1 Cor, xv. 38 the Marcionite had uvEUfjia for (jufia ;
and omitted 38 (b) — 42 (a) aud introduced 44 before 42 (b). In v, 45
Kupio; for 'ASa'fi, and omitted av&puTCo; in the latter clause. So at
least it appears in Dial, de recta fide, pp, 864, 868.]
2 Cor. IV, 13. omitted xaTa to yEypajifA^ov, Epiph. p, 367. (Migne p, 801,)
Romans, Omitted chapters XV, XVI, (Origen, Can. in Eom. lib, X, p. 687, Migne,
p, 1290, Only in the Latin of Rufinus.)
1 and 2 Thess Epiphanius says that the whole was so corrupted by Marcion
that he made no quotation: p. 371. Migne (p. 807).
Tert. V. 15 says Marcion added ESiou; in 1 Thess. ii. 15 (but this is
in many MSS), He also says, V, 16, that Marcion omitted ^v TCupl (pXoyo;
(2 Thess. ii, 8),
Ephesians (called Laodiceans), Epiphanius (p. 372, Migne p. 809) says that in
Eph. V. 31 Marcion omitted tt] yuvatxt, Tertullian (c, 17) also notices,
ii. 15, the omission of auTOu after oapxE; ii. 20, omission of ii:po(pir)Tuv,
iii. 9, omitted it (apparently under the idea that it would theu read
"hidden from God"),
Colossians. No distinct charge of alteration made against Marcion.
Phileraon. Tert, V. 21 says Marcion altered every Epistle save Philemon ; but
Epiphanius says it was wholly depraved by Marcion.
Philippians. Epiphanius says this also was hopelessly corrupted. TertuUian
quotes some passages, and makes no specific charge of corruption,
Epiphanius (p, 374, Migne p, 812) gives as an extract from what he found
appended to the Apostolicon from the so-called "Laodiceans" what (as he says)
is equivalent to Eph, iv, 5, but with the addition of el; XpiOTo; after pditTiajJia.
The Pastoral Epistles and Hebrews were rejected by Marcion.
The foregoing shows that Marcion's changes on such Pauline Epistles as he
received were few ; and that his omissions were few and (save from Gal. iii. and
Romans xv, and xvi,) unimportant. It is impossible to reconcile Romans, as he
allowed it to be, with his system — or even the mutilated Galatians.]

gAIfPOCEATES, 411

6. Carpocrates. 1
Iren. B. I. 25. 1. Carpocrates autem et qui ab eo mundum
quidem et ea, quae in eo sunt, ab angelis multo inferioribus in-
genito Patre factum esse dicunt. Jesum autem e Joseph natum,
et quum similis reliquis hominibus fuerit, distasse a reliquis se
cundum id, quod anima ejus firma et munda quum esset, com-
memorata fuerit, quae visa essent sibi in ea circumlatione, quae
fuisset ingenito Deo; et propter hoc ab eo missam esse ei vir
tutem, uti mundi fabricatores effugere posset et per omnes trans-
gressa et in omnibus liberata ascenderet ad eum; et eas, quae
similia ei amplectarentur, similiter.
Ibid. 2. Ea[m] igitur quae similiter atque ilia Jesu anima,
potest contemnere mundi fabricatores archontas, similiter acci
pere virtutes ad operandum similia. Quapropter et ad tantum ela
tionis provecti sunt, ut quidam quidem similes sese dicant Jesu;
quidam autem adhuc et secundum aliquid illo fortiores, qui sunt
distantes amplius quam illius discipuh, ut puta quam Petrus et
Paulus et reliqui apostoli ; hos autem in nullo deminorari a Jesu.
.... Si quis autem plus quam ille contemserit ea quae sunt
hic, posse meliorem quam ilium esse.
Ihid. 4. Et in tantam insaniam effraenati sunt (sc. Carpo-
cratiani), uti et omnia quaecunque sunt irreligiosa et impia, in
potestate habere et operari se dicant. Sola enim humana opi
nione negotia mala et bona dicunt. Et utique secundum trans-
' Carpocrates. The most biographical account of Carpocrates is in Clem.
Alex. Strom. III. 2, p, 511. There is a long account of his doctrine in Irenaeus,
B, I, 25, which Hippolytus reproduces (Haer, VII, 32) ; and Epiphanius (Haer, 27)
expands. See also references in Iren. B. II, 31 and following chapters. He was
a contemporary of Basilides, He seems to have taught a doctrine of human per
fectibility ; and some of his followers claimed to be of higher spiritual attainments
than the Apostles, This easily led to Antinomianism, and practical immorality,
especially of the sexual kind. According to Cleraent, their principles were of the
most licentious character. Their relation to the Scriptures is not easily established;
but the natural inference from the arguments of Clement and Irenaeus is, that they
accepted the New Testament. See Eom, iii, 20, vii. 7, and Mat, v, 28, quoted in
Clement, by himself or by tbem, as of admitted authority, Clement's chapter is
not one that can be easily quoted here. At all events, rejection of the New Tes
tament is not charged against them; and the extract from Epiphanius in our text
shows that they accepted Matthew's Gospel with some excision. It will be seen
that Irenaeus speaks of tbe Carpocratians as claiming the title of Gnostics, while
Hippolytus says it was the Naassenes who first claimed it.

412 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
migrationes in corpora oportere in omni vita et in omni actu
fieri animas: . . . uti, secundum quod scripta eorum dicunt, in
omni usu vitae factae animae ipsorum, exeuntes, in nihilo adhuc
minus habeant, ad operandum (autem) in eo : ne forte, propterea
quod deest libertati aliqua res, cogantur iterum mitti in corpus.
Propter hoc dicunt Jesum hanc dixisse parabolam: Cum es cum
adversaria tuo in via, da operam, ut lihereris ah eo, ne forte te
det judici, et judex ministro, et mittat te in carcerem. Amen dico
tibi, non exies inde, donee reddas novissimum quadrantem. (Mat.
V. 25; Luke xii. 58.) Et adversarium dicunt unum ex angehs,
qui sunt in mundo, quem diabolum vocant, dicentes factum eum
ad id, ut ducat eas, quae perierunt, animas a mundo ad prin
cipem : (et hunc dicunt esse primum ex mundi fabricatoribus) et
ilium alterum angelo, qui ministrat ei, tradere tales animas, uti
in aha corpora includat: corpus enim dicunt esse carcerem. Et
id quod ait: Non exies inde, quoadusque novissimum quad/rantem
reddas, interpretantur, quasi non exeat quis a potestate angelo-
rum eorum, qui mundum fabricaverunt; sic transcorporatum sem
per, quoadusque in omni omnino operationc, quae in mundo est,
fiat: et quum nil defuerit ei, tum liberatam ejus animam eh-
berari ad ilium Deum, qui est supra angelos mundi fabricatores.
Sic quoque salvari et omnes animas, sive ipsae praeoccupantes
in uno adventu in omnibus misceantur operationibus, sive de cor
pore in corpus transmigrantes, vel immissae in unaquaque specie
vitae adimplentes, et reddentes debita hberari, uti jam non fa
ciant in corpore. (Mat. v. 25 ; Luke xii. 58.)
Ihid. 6. Gnosticos se autem vocant; et imagines quasdam
quidem depictas, quasdam autem et de reliqua materia fabricatas
habent, dicentes formam Christi factam a Pilato, illo in tempore
quo fuit Jesus cum hominibus.
Epiph. Haer. B. I. t 2. h. 30. p. 138. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 429.)
'0 fiiv ydq Kfjqivdog xat Kaqno'/qdg, rep ainp yqwjisvot dfjdsv
naq' avzolg EiayysXicii dnd T^g dqyyg rov xard Mardalov Ei
ayysXiov did ryg ysvsaXoyiag, ^oiXovrai naqiardv ex aniqfiarog
'iwafjcp '/at Maqiag sivai rdv Xqiardv. Oirot di dXXa nvd dia
voovvrai. Haqa'/dxpavrsg ydq rdg naqd np Mardaico ysvsaXo-

VALENTINUS. 413

yiag 'dqyovrat rfjv dqyfjv noisiadat dg nqoslnov, Xiyovrsg 'on
'Eyivsro iv ralg fjfiiqatg 'Hqwdov ^aaiXswg, '/.r.X.^

7. Valentinus.^
Irenaeus, B. 1. Praef. 2. (Irenaeus says that he was in
duced to write by falhng in with the writings of the disciples
of Valentinus.) 'Avay/alnv yyyadfiyv, ivrvydv rnig innjivyfiaat
rdv, wg aiiToi Xiyovatv, OvaXsvrivov fiadyrdv, ivioig d' aircov
xat avfi^aXcov '/at '/araXa^dfisvog rfjv yvdfiyv airdv, fiyvvaai
aot, ayanyri, rd rsqarddy xat ^adia fivar'yqta, a oi ndvrsg
ywqovatv, inet fiy ndvreg rnv iy/icpaXov i^enrir/aatv (al. sayrj-
xaaiv). Ihid. B. I. 11. 1. (Irenaeus knew the writings of Valentinus
himself.) I8wfisv viv xat t^v roirwv dararov yvdfiyv, 8io nnv
xat rqidv ovtwv, jTwg nsqt rdv airdv oi rd aird Xiyovatv, dXXd
rolg nqayfiaat '/at rolg ovdfiaaiv ivavria anocpaivovrai. '0 fiiv
ydq nqcorog and T^g Xsynfiivyg yvwarr/yg alqiascog rdg dqydg sig
'idiov yaqa'/rfjqa 8i8aaxaXsiov jisdaqfidaag OiaXsvrlvog ovnog
i^yqncpdqyasv, /.r.X. (Here follows the Pleroma according to Va
lentinus) § 2. 2sxovvdog Xiyst, x.r.X. (Here follows the Pleroma
according to Secundus) § 3. "AXXog . . . int rd vxpyXdrsqov xat
^ This seems to mean that the followers of Cerinthus and Carpocrates used
the Gospel of Matthew without cutting off the genealogies, while the Ebionites cut
off thc genealogies altogether.
' Valentinus was a contemporary of Justin Martyr, and was in Rome during
the Episcopate of Hyginus, Pius, and Anicetus (Iren. B, III, 4. 3). According
to Clement of Alexandria he claimed Theodas, a disciple of Paul, as his teacher.
The date a,d, 140-160 represents the close of his life. He accepted the whole
New Testament, but perverted it by fanciful interpretations. He developed the
theory of emanations with great completeness. His central thought was that
God, in realising His own Being, created the universe. He who dwelt in the
eternal silence needed some object to love, — needed creation to which His at
tributes might flow out. The Beings thus made produced others, aud, in the
course of evolution, the existence of the material world and the Christian re
demption came about. His 30 Aeons made the Pleroma, He tried to find support
in Scripture for his speculations, but, as Hippolytus says, he was a Pythagorean
first and a Christian afterwards. His eclecticism drew from Persian, Egyptian,
Jewish, and (it would appear) Indian thought. By putting in many stages be
tween God and evil, he fancied he had accounted for the origin of evil and the
origin of raatter. The result was a systera of philosophy in which salvation con
sists of education ; in which free-will (the cardinal fact of human consciousness)
finds no rightful place ; and in which no Aeon bears the name of Repentance,
But it appealed, not without success, to the mass of raankind, while Basilides
spoke for the learned.

414 TESTIMONIES OF HEEE-nCS.
yvwffTixwTe^ov ins'/rsivoftsvog, x.r.X. (Here follows the outline of
another disciple's system.)
Ibid. B. III. 11.7. (The followers of Valentinus made specially
copious use of John's Gospel.) Hi autem qui a Valentino sunt,
eo quod est secundum Joannem plenissime utentes, &c. See be
fore, p. 67.
Ihid. B. Ill, 11. 9. (The followers of Valentinus made a
Gospel unlike the Apostolic Gospels, and called it the Gospel of
Truth.) Hi vero, qui sunt a Valentino, &c. See before, p. 70.
Ihid. B. III. 12. 12. (The Valentinians, like all heretics except
Marcion and his followers, accepted the Scriptures.) Reliqui vero
omnes falso scientiae nomine inflati, Scripturas quidem confiten-
tur, interpretationes vero convertunt, quemadmodum ostendimus
in primo libro. ^
Ihid. B. I. 8. 1. (The Valentinians claimed also to have tradi
tional doctrine) Toiairyg di T^g vnodiascog airiov ovayg, yv ovrs
nqoipfjrat ixfjqv^av, crvrs 6 Kiqtng i8i8a^ev, ovre dndaroXot naq-
i8w'/av, yv neqt rdv bXwv avyovat nXelov rdv dXXwv iyvw/ivai,
i^ dyqdcpwv dvaytvda'/ovrsg, xat, to 8fj Xsydfisvov, i^ dfifiov ayoi-
via nXi'/Eiv snirydsvovrsg, a^tdniara nqoaaqfid^siv nstqdvrat
rolg slqyfiivoig, yrot naqa^oXdg xvqia/dg, rj qyasig nqocprjrtxdg,
'ij Xdyovg dnoaroXtxoig, 'iva rd nXdofia airdv fifj dfidqrvqov st
vat 8o'/jj.^
Ibid. B. I. 3. 6. (The way they perverted the Scriptures.) Kat
oi fidvov ix TWV eiayyeXr/dv '/at rcov dnoaroXixdv netqcovrat rdg
dnodei^stg noisiadat, naqarqinovrsg rag sqfiyvsiag, xat qa8tovq-
yoivreg rdg i^yyqaeig' aXXd xat ex vdfiov xat nqocpyrdv, a re
noXXcov naqa^oXdv '/at dXXyyoqidv elqrjfiivwv '/at elg noXXd sX-
'/eiv 8vvafiivwv rd dficpi^nXnv did rrjg i^yyyaewg, srsqot 8i 8st-
vwg np nXdofian avrdv.
2 Corapare what Tertullian says below.
3 It is clear from this that the Valentinians accepted the Scriptures, but
alleged that through tradition they had attained to » truth which enabled them
rightly to interpret Scripture. Irenaeus says the sarae thing even more explicitly
in B. III. 2, 1, where he quotes the Valentinians as saying that without their tra
dition truth is not attainable. They also objected (B. Ill, 2, 2) to the orthodox
tradition preserved in the Churches, Evenit itaque, neque Scripturis jam neque
traditioni consentire eos. But this does not mean (Sup, Eel. II, 76, complete
edition) that they " rejected the writings of the N, T, as authoritative docu
ments," They made both Scripture and ordinary Church doctrine bend to their
speculations.

VALENTINUS. 415

EXAMPLES OP VALENTINIAN ftUOTATION OR INTEEPEETATION.
Irenaeus, B. I. 3. 2. 'AXXd '/at 8id rdv nqnyyovfiiviov roi
ovdfiarog^ avroi dvo yqafifidrwv, rnv rs Idra, xat rov rjza, roig
8s'/ao'/rd aldvag siayficog fiyvvsadai, '/at roig 8i'/a aldvag da-
avrwg 8id roi Idra yqdfifiarog, o nqoyyslrat rov dvdfiarng airni,
aqfiaivovat Xiysadai (al. ayfiaivsadat Xiyovai). Kat 8id rovrn
slqy/ivai rdv ^iwTjJ^a, twra tv, 'fj fiia xsqaia oi fiy naqiXdy,
'scog 'dv ndvra yivyrai. (Mat. v. 18.)^
Ihid. I. 3. 5. "Enstra nsqt rnv "Oqnv airdv, nv dfj '/at nXsi-
oaiv dvdfiaat '/aXovai, dio ivsqysiag systv airdv dnocpatvdfisvot,
rfjv Idqaari'/yv '/at rfjv fisqixyv '/at xadd fiiv sdqd^st '/at arq-
q'lCsi, 2ravqdv sivai, '/add di fieqitei xat dioqi^ei, "Oqnv rdv
fiiv 2ravqdv [al. Awryqa'] ovrwg Xiyovat fiefiyvv/ivat rdg ivsq
ysiag avrov' '/at nqcHrov ftiv Tt)v sdqaan'/fjv iv rep slnslv Og
ni § aardtst rdv aravqdv airni '/at dxoXnvdsl fiot, fia-
¦dyrfjg ifidg ov divarat ysviadai. Kai' "Aqag rdv arav
qdv avrov a'/oXoidst fioi. Tfjv di dtnqtart'/fjv avrai, iv np
elnslv ov/ fjXdov ^aXslv s'tq-ijvyv, dXXd fidyatqav.^ (Mat. x. 34.)
Ibid. B. I. 8. 5. (The Valentinians and John's Gospel.) "En 8e
'iwdvvyv rdv fiadrjryv rov Kvqiov diddaxovai t^ nqdryv dydodda
fisfirjvv/ivai airalg Xi^sat, Xiyovrsg ovnog' Icodvvqg b fiadrjzfjg
roi Kvqiov ^ovXdfisvog slnslv rfjv rcov bXcov yivsaiv, '/ad' yv rd
ndvra nqoi^aXsv b Haryq, dqyfjv nva vnoridsraL rd nqcorov
ysvvydiv vnd rov Qsov, ov dfj xat vldv Movnysvy xat Qsdv '/i-
xXrjxsv iv cp rd ndvra b Haryq nqni^aXs ansqfiari'/dg. ^Ynd
di rovrov cpyat rdv Adyov nqo^s^Xfjadai xat iv avrip rfjv oXyv
rdv Aldvwv ovaiav, yv avrdg varsqov ifioqcpwasv o Adyog. Enst
ovv nsqt nqdryg ysviaswg Xiyst, '/aXdg dnd T^g a^^^g, rovTEan''
rov Qsov xat rov Adyov , t^v dtdaffxa/liav notsirat. Aiyst di
ovrwg' 'Ev dqyfj fjv b Adyog, xat 6 Adyog yv nqdg rdv
* The first letter of this name of Jesus (I) being ^10; the second (H)
being = 8.
6 See also Hippol, Eef. Haer. VI. 24.
° We give this as a speciraen of the interpretations by which the Valen
tinians tortured the most unlikely passages of Scripture to support their specula
tions. The boundary or fence of the Pleroma was called Stauros or Horos, in
order that they might explain such passages as 1 Cor, i. 18 ; Gal, vi. 14, (See
passage below,) Iu the present case the use of the two naraes is defended be
cause of the twofold function of confirmation and division.
' The Latin translates: "toute'oti tou ulou."

416 TESTIMONIES OP HEEETICS.
Qsdv, '/at Qsdg yv b Adyog' ovrog yv sv aqyy nqdg rdv
Qsov. Hqdrsqov diaarsiXag rd rqia, Qsdv, 'xat 'Aqxqv, xal
Adyov, ndXiv aird svoi, 'iva '/at tijv nqo^oXyv sy.arsqwv airdv
dsi^y, rov rs Ylnv xat rov Adyov, '/at rfjv nqdg dXX'rjXovg dfia,
xat rfjv nqdg Harsqa svwatv. . . . Aiyet di ovrcog' Kat b
Aoyog adq§ Eyivsro '/at ia'/'fjvwasv iv fjfilv, xat idea-
aafieda tijv 8d§av airov, 8d^av wg fiovoysvnv g naqd
Harqdg, nX'yqyg ydqirog '/at dXydsiag. 'Axqi ^wg ovv xat
rfjv nqdryv ifvyvvas rsTqada' Hariqa slnwv, xat Xaqtv xat rdv
Movpysvfj xal 'AX'qdsiav. O'vrwg b 'Icodvvyg nsqt Tryg nqdryg '/at
fiyrqdg rdv bXiov Aldvwv dy8od8og e'iqy/e. Harsqa ydq siqy/s,
xat Xdqiv '/at Movoyevfj xal 'AX'fjdetav xat Adyov '/at Zwfjv '/at
"Avdqwnov '/at 'E'/'/Xyaiav.^ (John i.)
Ihid. B. I. 3. 1. (The Valentinians used Paul's Epistles) Kat
rdv HavXov cpaveqcorara Xiyovai rovgde Aldvag dvofidtetv noX-
Xd'/ig, srt 8i xat r-qv rd^tv airdv rsryqrj/ivat ovrwg slndvra'
Elg ndaag rdg ysvsdg rdv aldvwv rov aliovog. (Eph. iii. 21.)
Ihid. B. I. 3. 4. Kat vnd rov HaiXov ds cpavsqdg did roiro
slqfjadai Xiyovai' Kal airdg san rd ndvra' '/at ndXtv Hdvra
sig airdv, xat s^ airoi rd ndvra' '/at ndXiv 'Ev airip xaroixsl
ndv rd nXfjqwfia ryg dsoryrog' xat rd' 'Ava'/ecpaXatdaaadat 8i
rd ndvra iv np Xqianp 8id rov Qsov, sqfiyvsvovatv slqfjadat,
'/at s'i nva dXXa rotavra, (Col. iii. 9. 11; Rom. xi. 36; Eph.
i. 10.) Ihid. B. I. 3. 5. HavXov 8i rdv dndaroXov '/at airdv intfiifivy-
axeadai rovrov roi aravqov Xiyovaiv, ovrcog ¦ '0 Xdyog ydq 6 rov
aravqov rolg fiiv anoXXvfiivoig fiwqia iart, rolg 8i aw^ajtivoig
fjfilv 8ivafiig Qsov' -/at ndXiv 'Efiol 8s fifj yivotr o iv fiy8svt
'/avydadat, sl fiy iv ripi aravqip rov 'lyaov, 8i' ov ifiot '/dofiog
saravqwrat, xdyd rep '/dajtiij. (1 Cor. i. 18; Gal. vi. 14.)
Clem. Alex. Strom. II. 20. p. 488. 'AXXd '/at OiaXsvrlvog
nqdg rtvag iniariXXwv avralg Xi^sat yqdcpst nsqt rdv nqoa-
aqryfiarwv Elg di sartv ayaddg, ov na^qyaicc fj did rov vlov
cpaviqwaig, '/at dt aizov fidvov divatro dv fj '/aq8ia '/adaqd ys
viadai navrdg novyqov nvsifiarog i^wdovfiivov T^g 'xaqdiag.
(Mat. xix. 17; v. 8(?).
8 In the Latin is added after "Ecclesiara": et Ptolemaeus quidem ita. There
are sirailar interpretations of John i. 18 in Irenaeus, B. I. 8. 5,

VALENTINUS. 417
Ibid. VII. 17. p. 898. (After saying that Basilides claimed
Glaucias as his teacher, Clement adds:) 'Qaairwg 8i xat OiaXev-
rlvnv Qendd 8iaxy/oivat cpiqovaiv ' yvdqifiog 8' ovrog yeydvei
HaiXov. Tertullian de praescript. haeret. c. 30. Item Valentinus, aliter
exponens, et sine dubio emendans, hoc omnino (al. nomine) quic
quid emendat, ut mendosum retro, anterius fuisse demonstrat.
Ibid. c. 37. (See before, p. 48.)
Ibid. c. 38. Alius manu scripturas, alius sensu expositiones
intervertit. Neque enim si Valentinus integro instrumento uti
videtur, non callidiore ingenio, quam Marcion manus intulit ve
ritati. Marcion enim exserte et palam machaera, non stilo usus
est, quoniam ad materiam suam eaedem scripturarum confecit,
Valentinus autera pepercit, quoniam non ad materiam scripturas,
sed materiam ad scripturas excogitavit: et tamen plus abstulit
et plus adjecit, auferens proprietates singulorum quoque verbo
rum, et adjiciens dispositiones non comparentium rerum.
Origen, c. Cels. II. 27. Msrayaqd^avrag 8i rd siayyiXiov
dXXovg oix olda, ^ rovg dnd Maq'/iwvng, '/at roig dnd OiaXsv-
rivov, oifiai di '/at Toi'g dnd Aov/dvov.
Hippol. Eef. Haer. VI. 29. (p. 270.) ( Valentinus a Pythagorean
and a Platonist rather than a Christian philosopher.) Tntavry Ttg,
wg iv '/scpaXainig slnslv insXddvra, fj Hvdaydqov '/at HXdziovng
awiary/s dd^a, dcp' fjg OiaXsvrlvog, ovx and rdiv siayysXicov t^v
a'iqsaiv rfjv savrnv awayaycov, wg inidei^ofiev, di'/aiwg Hvdayo-
qt'/ng '/at HXarwvixdg, oi Xqtariavdg Xoytadeiy. OiaXsvzlvog
roivvv '/at 'Hqa'/Xicov '/at HroXsfialog '/at ndaa fj rnirwv O'ynXy,
ol Hvdaydqov '/at HXdrwvog fiadyrat d'/nXnvdqaavrsg rolg '/ad-
yyyaafiivotg, dqtdfiqri'/yv tijv didaa/aXiav rfjv savrdv '/ars^d-
Xnvro. Ibid. VL 34. (p. 284). Tovro iart, cprjat, rd yeyqajifiivov iv rf
yqacpfj ' Toirov ydqtv '/dfinrw rd yovard fiov nqdg rdv Qedv xat
Hariqa xat Kiqinv rov Kvqinv fjfidv 'lyaov Xqiarov 'iva ddy vfilv
0 Qedg '/arat'/fjaai rdv Xqiardv elg rdv I'aw dvdqwnov rovriart rdv
xpvyixdv ov TOV awfianxdv 'iva e^ia'yiaqre vofjaai ri rd ^d&og 'dnsq
iartv b narfjq rdv 'dXcov '/at ri rd nXdrog 'dnsq iartv b arav-
27

418 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
qdg , 0 oqog roi nXrjqwfidrog 'ij ri rd fiyxog rovriart rd nXrjqwfia
rdv aldvwv.^ (Eph. iii. 14, 16-18.)
Ihid. Aid rovro xpvyi'/dg, cpqatv, dvdqwnog oi diysrat rd
rov nvsifiarog roi Qsofj' ficoqia ydq air^ iari. (1 Cor. ii. 14.)
Ibid. I'eyevvrjzai 6 'lyaovg 8id Maqiag rfjg naqdivov xard
rd elqrjfiivov Hvevfia dyiov ineXeiaerat snt ai' nvsvfia
sartv fj aocpia' '/at divafiig vxpiarov snta'/idaei aot'
vxpiarog ianv b dyfitovqyog' dto rd ysvvw fisvov sx aov
dytov '/Xyd'yasrat. (Luke i. 35.)^''
Ihid. VI. 35. (p. 284.) Hdvrsg ovv ol nqocpyzat '/at b vdfiog
iXdXyaav and rov dyfiiovqyov , fiwqov Xiyst Qsov, fiwqot oi8iv
sl8drsg. Aid roiro, cpyat, Xiyst b 2corrjq' Hdvrsg ol nqd ifiov
iXyXvddrsg '/Xinrat '/at Xyarat slat. (John x. 8.)^^
9 See echoes VI, 35 (Eom, xvi, 25; Eph, iii, 9); VI, 30 (Heb, xii. 22);
VI, 29 (1 John iv 8).
'" This passage is clearly from St Luke, though it is not verbatim, ulo; ©sou
being omitted. The words i-x. oou are not genuine, but they are a very old and
respectably supported addition for which the Peshito and a, c, e, m of O, L, can
be cited. See Sanday's able argument using this as a proof of the antiquity of
the Gospel, inasmuch as it had time to be corrupted before this Gnostic cited it.
On this passage the Valentinians were divided, Ptolemaeus and Heracleon, as
leading the Italian branch, declaring that the body of Jesus was ijiuxtxdv, while
Axionicus and Bardesanes, as representing the Eastern branch, said it was TtveufJio-
Tixov. The question however arises, whether Hippolytus in his text is quoting
the founder of the school, or some follower. It is impossible to say with perfect
certainty, but, unless Valentinus was a myth, he must have been the leader of
the Valentinians, and it is unreasonable to ask us to believe that he had none
of those quotations which his followers founded so much upon. The same ques
tion arises here as upon Basilides, and the (f)t]<jl of Hippolytus is ambiguous in
both cases. Canon Westcott in his fourth edition withdraws further than is ne
cessary from his former position, maintaining that the citations are by Valentinus
himself The way iu which Hippolytus first quotes this passage from the repre
sentative of the school and afterwards refers to the disputes between the two
branches, makes us think that he is quoting the founder — the disputes being of
later date. He resumes in c. 36 with i-KiXiyti. But even if tbis be not admitted,
the citation is at all events by an early Valentinian — long before Hippolytus, and
not later than Irenaeus, whose contemporary Heracleon was. The quotation is
not later than 150-180 A.D, — and the text must be much earlier.
' ' In regard to the citations of John's Gospel there is of course the already
noticed ambiguity of i()t)(Si. Was the writer Valentinus or a follower? Baur and
others say that the Fourth Gospel adopted its phrases from Valentinus ; but when
Hippol. IV, 51 compares the Hebdomad of Simon, — vou;., ^ittvota, ovo,aa, cpuvq,
Xoytofio';, £v5unif)ai;, o ioTu; OTa; aTujooVEVo;, — with Valentinus's vou;, aXij^cia,
Xo'yo;, Suii , SvlSpuito;, ^xxXviaSa, o uaTiip , he leads the reader to accept his
stateraent that the whole school of Valentinus used and founded upon the Fourth
Gospel frora which its fundamental terms were drawn. Heracleon's Commentary
would not have needed to twist John's Gospel if one of the school had written
it. The simple use of the terms by the Evangelist must be the original; thc
distortion by the philosophers is a subsequent stage. See Iren, I, 8, I, 9, I. 10.

VALENTINUS. , HERACLEON. 419
Ihid. (p. 286.) Tovrn iart, cpyat, 'rd elqqfiivnv '0 iyeiqag
Xqiardv ix ve'/qiov twonoiyast '/at rd dvyrd adfiara vftcov, yrot
ipvyixd. (Rom. viii. 11.)
Ihid. VIII. 10. (p. 422.) Tovrd iart, cpyatv, o Xiyst b ^wrr'jq-
Edv fiy Tig yswydfj s^ vdarog '/at nvsifiarog , oi'/ slasXevaerai elg
rfp> [iaatXeiav rdv ovqavcov 'on rd ysysvvyfiivov ex T^g ffa^xog
adq^ ianv. (John iii. 5, 6.)
Ihid. IX. 12. (p. 458.) Kat roiro sJvat rd slqyfiivov Oi ni-
areveig 'on iyw iv rip narqt xat o nazfjq iv ifioi; (John xiv. 11.)' ^
8. Heracleon.^
Irenaeus, B. II. 4. 1. (Heracleon was a Valentiniani) Si au
tem non prolatum est, sed a se generatum est: et simile est et
fraternum et ejusdem honoris id, quod est Vacuum, si Patri, qui
praedictus est a Valentino; antiquius autem et multo ante ex
istens et honoiificentius reliquis Aeonibus ipsius Ptolemaei et
Heracleonis et reliquis omnibus qui eadem opinantur.^
Clem. Alex. Strom. IV. 9. p. 595. {Heracleon the most dis
tinguished Valentinian.) 'Hqa'/Xiwv 6 T^g OiaXevrivov a'yoXyg
do'/ifiwrarog. Hippol. Bef. Haer. VI. 35. (p. 286.) (Heracleon of the Italian
school of Valentinians.) Olfiiv dnd T^g 'iraXiag, wv iartv 'Hqa/Xicov
See good remarks in Bleek, N. T, Int. § 86. See also Westcott, Canon, p. 296
(4tli edition). ' ' See also echoes of John's Gospel vi, 32 {a ap^uv tou xoa.aou toutou),
' Heracleon, There is no doubt about Heracleon having quoted the Gospels
of Luke and John and 2 Timothy as seen in our text. He quoted also Matthew,
Eomans, and 1 Corinthians (see VV'estcott, Canon). Origen quotes his commentary
on John more than 60 tiraes; commenting indeed in many passages quite as
much on Heracleon as on John, We have quoted the principal references to his
date and position, and a few passages to illustrate his mode of teaching. His
minute care of the letter of Scripture is visible in these passages. He i was, so
far as is known, the first commentator on the New Testament, He wrote a com
mentary on John, and we have at least a fragmentary comment of his upon Luke,
His date is therefore of importance. See note 1 on Ptolemaeus (below p. 422).
He quoted the book called ' Peter's Preaching, ' and Origen refers to this quota
tion when discussing thc character of true worship as declared in Jobn iv, 22.
(Origen, Comment, in Joann, t, 13. p. 226. Migne, Vol, IV. p. 424.) The pas
sage itself is found and discussed in Clem, Strom. VI, 5, 39-43, p, 759.
* The only mention of Heracleon by Irenaeus; who thus mentions hira
among the Valentinians in course of an argument to show that in constructing
the world the Gnostics of that school had not provided for the origin of xe'vufJLa
(or Vacuitas, or Vacuum), 21*

420 TESTIMONIES OP HEEETICS.
xat HroXefialog xpvyt'/dv cpaat rd adfia rnv 'Iqani yeyovivai. . . .
Ol di dnd rfjg dvaroXyg Xiyovaiv, wv iartv 'A^tdvixog '/at Aq-
8yaidvyg, 'on nvsvfiart'/dv yv rd adfia roi ^wrfjqog.
Ihid. VI. 29. (p. 270). (Heracleon a folloiver of Greek Philoso
phy) OvaXsvrlvog roivvv xat 'Hqa'/Xiwv xat HrnXsfialng '/at ndaa
fj rovnov ayoXy, ol Hvdaydqov '/at HXdrwvog fiadyrat, d'/oXovdrj-
aavrsg rolg xadyyyaafiivotg , dqidfiynxfjv rfjv 8i8aa'/aXiav rfjv
savrdv '/ars^dXovro.
Origen, Comment, in Joann. Tom. II. p. 66. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 137.) (Heracleon reported to he specially connected with Va
lentinus) Tdv OiaXevrivov Xeydfievov eivat yvdqifiov* 'HqaxXiwva,
diyyovfievov rd Hdvra 8i airov iyivsro.
Epiph. Haeres. I t. 3. h. 36, p. 262. (Migne, Vol. I p. 633.)
'Hqa'/Xiwv ng rovrov rdv KoXdq^aaov diadsxsrai.^
SPECIMENS OF THE WEITINGS OP HEEACLEON.
Clem. Alex. Strom. IV. 9. p. 595. JTag ovv bang sdv bfi o-
Xoyyay iv ifiot s'finqoad sv rdv dvdqdncov, bfioXoyrjaw
'/dyd iv avrcp sfinqoadsv roi Harqdg fiov iv ovqa
volg. (Mat. X. 32.) "Orav 8i cpiqwatv vfidg sig rdg aw-
aycoydg '/at rdg dqydg '/at rdg s^ovaiag, fifj nqo fisqi-
fivdrs ncog anoXoyydfjrs, ¦y ri stnyrs' rd ydq dyiov
nvsvfia 8t8d^st Vfidg iv airfj rf aqcj ri 8el einelv.
(Luke xii. 11, 12.^) Toirov i^rjyoijisvog rdv rdnov, 'Hqa'/Xiwv b
T^g OiaXsvrivov ayoXfjg 8o'/tfidrarog '/ard Xi^tv cpqatv bfinXn-
yiav stvat tijv ftiv iv ry niarsi '/at noXirstq, rfjv 8e ev cpwvy.
' There is doubt as to the meaning of yvupt|j,o; — probably it is " special
friend" or "special pupil."
* Epiphanius raakes Marcus "succeed Secundus and Epiphanes and Ptoleraaeus
and Valentinus" (Haer. 34), and Colarbasus (Haer. 35) succeed Marcus, whose
"fellow-disciple he was" (Analysis of Tom. 3), He next makes Heracleon succeed
Colarbasus, as in our text. But he is confused and inaccurate. It appears that
he and others mistook a (probably corrupt) passage of Irenaeus, and changed
the Tetrad which began the Pleroma of Marcus, (the Hebrew name of which was
Col-Arba, the Voice of Four) into the narae of a heretic, Colarbasus, round whoso
mythical name gradually grew a collection of strange doctrines he was supposed
to have taught! See Hort's article "Colarbasus" in Smith's Diet, of Christian
Biography for a good account. In Haer, 41 Epiphanius makes Heracleon precede
Cerdo), who flourished about a.d. 140.
B This is the only reference to Heracleon's Coraraentary on Luke, Clement
does not mention his Coraraentary on John, from which Origen quotes very often
without mentioning that on Luke, Hippolytus raentions neither.

HEEACLEON. 421
H fiiv nvv iv cpcovfj bfioXoyia '/at int rdv i^nvaidv yivsrat, yv
fidvqv, cpqatv, bfinXnyiav fjyovvrai elvai ol noXXot oiy vytdg, 8v-
vavrat di ravryv T'qv bfioXoyiav '/at nl vnnxqiral bfinXnyelv.
'AXX oid' e'vqsdrjasrai ovrog b Xdyog '/adoXi'/cog slqy fiivog' oi
ydq ndvrsg ol acoUftsvnt cofioXdyyaav tijv did rfjg cpcovyg bfioXo
yiav '/at i^fjXdnv, i^ wv Mardalng, OiXinnog, Q_wfidg, Asvig
'/al dXXoi noXXoi. Kat ianv fj 8Ld rrjg cpwvyg bfioXoyia oi '/a-
doXixfj aXXd fisqt'/'fj' '/adoXt'/y 8i rjv viv Xiyst rfjv iv s'qyoig xat
nqd^sai xaraXXyXoig rfjg s'tg airdv niarswg. "Ensrat di rainy
TJJ bfioXoyiif '/at fj fieqtxfj fj int rdv i^ovaidv, idv 8iy '/at 6 Xd
yng a'iqy bfinXnyfjast ydq obrog '/at rfj cpcovy dqddg nqoofioXo-
yfjaag nqdrsqov ry diadiasi. Kat '/aXwg int ftiv rdv djioXo-
yovvTcov, "iv ifiot" sinsv snt di rdv dqvovfiivwv rd "ifii"
nqnai&y/Ev. Ovznt ydq '/'dv rfj cpwvy bftnXnyriacoaiv airdv, dq-
vnvvrat avrdv rfj nqd^st jifj bfioXoyovvrsg, fidvot d' iv aird) bfio-
Xoynvaiv nl iv rfj '/ar airdv bfioXoyicf '/at nqd^st (itdivrsg, iv
oig '/at avrdg bfinXnysl ivsiXyfifiivng airolg xal iydfisvog vnd
TOVTCOV, dinnsq "dqvrjaaadat savrdv nidinors dvvarat."
(2 Tim. ii. 13.) 'Aqvovvrat 8i airdv ol fifj 'dvrsg iv aircp' ov ydq
etnev, "og dqvyaqrat sv ifiot," dXX' "ifii'" oidstg ydq nors
cov iv avrcp dqvslrai airdv. Td di "sfinqoadsv rdv dv
dqdncov" '/at rdv awtofiivcov '/airdv idvt'/dv di bfioiwg naq'
oig fiiv '/at rjj noXirsict, naq' oig di xat rfj cpwvy. Aidnsq dq
vrjaaadat airdv ni8Enors 8ivavrat, dqvoivrat 8i avrdv ol ftfj
ovrsg iv avnp." Taira ftiv 6 'Hqa'/Xiwv.
Origen, Comment, in Joann. Tom. II. p. 66. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 137.) Btaicog 8e oifiat xai ywqtg fiaqrvqiov, rdv OiaXsvrivov
Xsydfisvnv sivat yvdqtfinv 'Hqa'/Xscova dtyyoi fisvov rd' Hdvra d i'
airov iyivsro, i^siXycpivat ndvra rdv xdofinv xat rd iv ainp,
i'/Yt-Xsinvra rdv ndvnov rd oaov int rjj vnodiaet avrov rd roi
'/da fiov, '/at rdv iv aircp diacpiqovra. Oqat ydq, ov rdv aldva
'] rd iv np alcovi yeyovivai did rov Adyov, drtva o'ierat nqd roi
Adyov ysyovivat. 'AvatdiarEqov 8i lardfisvog nqdg rd' Kat
"ycoqtg airov iyivsro ovdi 'dv fiy svXa^oi fisvog rd, "My
nqoadjjg rolg Xdyntg airov, fva fifj sXiy^y as, xat ipsvdfg yivy,"
nqoaridyat rep' ai8i 'sv, rdv sv rip '/dafict), '/at ry xriasi.
(John i.)
Ihid. Tom. VL p. 130. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 251.) '0 jiiv

422 TESTI?/10NIES OF HEEETICS.
'Hqa'/Xiwv o'israi , on dno'/qlvsrai 6 'luidvvyg rolg i'/ rdv 0a-
qiaaicov 7i Sficpdslaiv, oi nqdg o i'/slvoi inyqdrwv, dXX o avrdg
i^niXszn ' savrdv Xavddvwv, 'on xaryyoqsl rov nqocpfjrov dfiadiag,
siys aXXo iqwrdjisvng nsqt dXXov dno'/qivsrai.
Ihid. Tom. XX. p. 339. (Migne, Vol. IV. p. 628.) [_'0 'Hqa-
xXiwv'] ndXiv etg rd' rag inidvfiiag roi narqdg vfidv diXsrs
notelv, diaariXXsrai Xiycov, rdv didfinXnv fifj sysiv diXyfia, dXX'
inidvfiiag. (John viii. 44), '/at iftcpaLvsrai airddsv rd ddiavdrjznv
rov Xdyov' deXetv ydq rd novyqd ndg 'dv Ttg bfioXoyfjaat e'/el-
vnv. . . . Merd ravrd cpyat b 'Hqa'/Xiwv wg aqa rai/za etqyrat
ov nqng roig cpiaet roi dia^dXov vlovg, rovg yoi'/oig, dXXd nqdg
rovg xpvxt'/oig diaet vlovg dia^dXnv yevofiivovg ' dcp cov rfj cpvaei
dvvavrai nvsg xat diasi vlot Qeov yqyfiariaai.
9. Ptolemaeus.^
Irenaeus, B. I. Praef. § 2. .(Ptolemaeus a pupil of Valen
tinus.) Kat xadwg divafiig fjfiiv, r-qv rs yvdfiyv avrcuv nov vvv
naqad i8aa'/dvTwv , Xiyw dy rdv nsqt HroXsfialov, dndvdiOfia
ovaav T^g OiaXsvrivov ayoXfjg awrdfiwg '/at aacpwg dnayyeXovfiev.
' There is not much difficulty in regard to the use made by Ptoleraaeus of
the New Testament, There is no good reason to doubt the genuineness of his
' Letter to Flora,' in which are references to Matthew, Mark, John, Eomans, Co
rinthians and Ephesians. In Irenaeus we find that he also referred to Galatians
and Colossians, The difficulty in estimating his testimony arises from doubt as
to his date, Irenaeus in Books I, II. of his great work raentions Ptolemaeus
often, and once he names Heracleon along with him, Irenaeus wrote those books
not later than a.d, 182, The author of 'Supernatural Religion' finds in Epi
phanius and in the ' Chronicon Paschale ' grounds for believing that Theodotion's
translation of the O. T. (which Irenaeus quotes in Book III,) was not published
till A.D. 184, But we have to do with Books I. and II, and need not discuss
the value of the argument drawn from such sources, Irenaeus seems to have
personally known some of the leading Valentinians in Rome a,d, 178 (see his
Preface to Eef Haer. § 2), and, as Ptolemaeus and Heracleon were of the " Ita
lian" school (see Hippolytus in our text), it is probable that he met Ptolemaeus,
who had founded a school before the time Irenaeus was in Eome. So ranch for
Irenaeus, But we find from Cleraent and Origen that Heracleon was in some
special way the pupil of Valentinus, and the most distinguished of his school. If
so, he must have been the , contemporary of his master during part at least of his
life. The activity of Valentinus (a,d, 140-160) is therefore at the latest time
when Heracleon probably avowed bis attachment to John's Gospel, on which he
afterwards wrote a commentary. Any other supposition destroys all idea of the
continuity of the school of Valentinus, But that continuity is one of the best
attested facts in the early history of Christianity, We may conclude therefore that
by the middle of the second century this school agreed with the orthodox Chris
tians in accepting the Gospels,

PTOLEMAEUS. 423
Tertullian, Adv. Valent. c. 4. (Ptolemaeus and Heracleon only
carried out the views of Valentinus) Valentinus viam delineavit,
eam postmodo Ptolemaeus intravit, deduxit et Heracleon inde
tramites quosdam.
Ptolemaeus' Letter to Flora. (Epiph. Haer. I. t. 2. h. 33. p. 217.
Migne, Vol. I. p. 557.) J. Ol'/ia ydq 'y ndXtg jisqiadslaa icp'
savrfjv, on fifj dvvarat arfjvai, b 2wrfjq fjfidv dnscpfjvaro. "Ert ye
T^v rov '/dajiov dqfiinvqyiav I8iav Xiyet etvat, rd re ndvra 8t'
avTov yeyovivai , '/at ywqtg airov yeyovivai oi8iv, 6
andaroXog nqoanoareqyaag t^v twv xpevdyyoqoivrwv dvvndararov
aocpiav, xat oi cpdoqonoiov Qeov, dXXd 8i'/aiov '/at fiiaonovqqov.
(Mark iii. 25 [Mat. xii. 25]; John i. 3.)
Ihid. /IiaXeydfievdg nov 6 'Swrfjq nqdg roig neqt rov dno-
araalov av^yrovvrag aircp, b dy dnoardaiov s^elvai ivevojiodi-
ryro, scpy airolg' on BIwiayg nqdg rfjv O'/Xyqoxaqd iav
Vfidv enirqexpe rd dnoXvsiv T'fjv yvval'/a airov. 'An
dqyyg ydq oi yivovsv ovrwg. Qsdg ydq, cpyat, avvi'Qsv^s ravryv
rfjv av^vyiav. Kai' o avvi^sv^ev b Kiqiog, dvdqwnog fiy
ycoqt^ETco. (Mat. xix. 8, 6; Mark x. 5, 6.)
Ibid. p. 218. "On di xat twv nqsaSvriqwv siai nvsg avfine-
nXsyfiivat naqaddastg iv np vdfiijj, dyXol '/at roiro 6 2iorfjq. '0
ydq Qsdg, cpyatv, sins ' Tifia rdv nariqa aov, xal rfjv fiyziqa aov,
Iva sv aot yivyrai. 'Yfislg ds, cpyaiv, slqfj/ars rolg nqsa^vri-
qnig Xiycov, 8dqnv rip Qscp o idv wcpsXydjjg i§ ifiov, xat fj'/vqd-
aars rdv vdfiov rov Qeov did tjjv naqddoaiv rdv nqea^vriqiov
Vfidv. (Mat. XV. 5-8; Mark vii. 10-13.)
Ihid. p. 219. HdXtv di 8fj rd 'sv fiiqog, 6 airov rov Qsov
vdfiog, dtatqslrat sig rqia nvd, etg rs rfjv xadaqdv vojiodsaiav,
rdv davfinXo'/ov np '/axip, ng xat '/vqiwg vdfing Xiysrat, ov oi'/
yXds '/araXiaat 6 2wTyq, dXXd nXyqcoaai, '/.r.X. (Mat. V. 17.)
Ibid. p. 220. Kat rd ndaya di bfioicog, '/at rd d^vfia, 'dn
el-/dveg yaav, dyXol xat HavXog b dndaroXog' Td ds Hdaya
fjficov, Xiycov, iridy Xqiardg' '/ai 'iva yrs, cpyatv, 'dt,v-
fini fiy fisriyovTsg ^ifiyg (tifiyv di vvv tijv '/a'/iav Xiysi),
dXX' yrs viov cpiqajia. (1 Cor. V. 7.)
lUd. Ovrog yovv '/at airdg b roi Qeov eivai vdfiog bfioXoyoi-
fievog elg rqia diaiqeirai, elg di rd nXyqoifisvov dnd roi Icorfjqog.
Td ydq, nv cpovsvastg, oi fiotysiasig, oi'/ intoqxyaetg,

424 testimonies of heretics.
EV np ftyd' dqyiadrjvat, fiy8E snid-vfiyasig nBqisiXynrat. Aiai-
qslrat 8i '/at s'tg rd dvaiqovfievov reXeiwg' rd ydq' ocpdaXfiov
dvrt dcpdaXfini, '/at nddvra dvrt ddnvrog, avfinenXeyfii-
vov rfj ddixiiji, '/at aird s'qyov Tr/g ddi'/iag syov, avyqsdy vnd rov
2coTyqng did twv ivavriwv rd di ivavria dX?.-yXwv slatv avaiqe-
ri/d. Eyco ydq Xiyco vfilv, fifj avr laryvat oXcog rip no
vyqip, dXXd idv rig ae qaniay, arqsxpnv avnp '/at t^v
dXXyv aiaydva. (Mat. v. 38, 39.)
Ihid. p. 221. Kat sl b riXsing Qsdg dyaddg ian '/ard rfjv
savrov cpiaiv, wansq xat eariv "Eva ydq ftdvnv slvai dyaddv Qsdv
roi savrov nariqa 6 2corqq fjfiiov dnscpfjvaro. (Mat. xix. 17.)
Ibid. Td di roi avfinEnXsyfiivov vdfiov rjj ddi'/ia, slncov
rnv vdfiov rcov ivrnXwv iv ddyfiaai '/aryqyfjadai. Td di rav
aavfinXd'/ov np ysiqovi. '0 fiiv vdfiog, slndv, dytog, '/at fj
ivroXfj dyia xat 8t'/aia '/at dyad'rj. (Eph. ii. 15; Rom.
VH. 12.)
10. Marcus. 1
Iren. B. I.\Q. \. Tyv ovv yiveaiv rdv Aldvcov avnov, '/at
T^v nXdvyv rov nqo^drov xat dveiqsaiv svdaavrsg int rd avrd,
fivari'/drsqov sntystqovaiv dnayyiXXsiv ovrot ol sig dqidfiovg rd
ndvra '/ardyovrsg, ex fiovddog '/at 8vd8og cpdaxovrsg rd bXa aw-
saryxivai. . . . rip aircp rqdncij '/at and ryg 8w8sxd8og ano-
araaiv fiiav 8ivafiiv dnoXwXivat fiavrsvovraf '/at rairyv sivat
TJJV yvval'/a rfjv dnoXiaaaav rfjv dqayfiyv, '/at dxpaaav Xi%vov,
xal svqdiaav ainrjv. (Luke xv.)
Und. 18. 3. 'AXXd xat rfjv 8s'/d8a ayfiaivsadat 8td rdv 8i'/a
' Marcus, Concerning the views of Marcus and the Marcosians, a section of
the Valentinians, see Irenaeus, B.L 13-21; Hippol. VI. 39-54; Pseudo-Tert. c. 5.
p. 761 (Oehler); Philastrius Haer. 42; Epiph. Haer. 34, &c. Marcus professed
(says Irenaeus) to improve upon his Master; and he had more intricate and more
fanciful speculations. He dwelt much on tbe power of letters and of numbers.
In his system was a Tetrad; and in the original text of Irenaeus (B. I. 14. 1) (or
in the authority from which he quoted) the phrase SalsVip (Col-Arba, voice of
the four) occurred. This was amplified into " Colarbasus ; " Hippolytus so names
some one, and Epiphanius ingeniously made an account of his heresy. This he
did by extracting from Irenaeus (B. I. 12. 3) what is said of quidam prudentiores,
who are mentioned after Ptoleraaeus. See Lipsius, Zur Quellen-Kritik des Epipha
nius, p. 166, See also Dr Hort's account of the (not quite cleared up) puzzle iu
Smith's Diet, of Christian Biography, Art. " Colarbasus. " It is scarcely necessary
to show Marcus's references to the New Testaraent, or his perversions of John's
Gospel.

MARCUS. PEEPON. DOCETAE. 425
idvcov, WV inyyyslXaro 6 ©eog np 'Afiqadfi ... '/at ol 8i:/a
andaroXot, oig cpavsqnirat fisrd rfp' sysqatv 6 Kvqiog, rov Qcojid
fiy naqdvrog, rdv aoqarov disrinovv '/ar airovg dsxdda. (John
XX. 24.)
Ihid. 20. 2. "Evta 8i xat rdv iv evayyeXicj) xeifiivwv elg rov
rov rnv xc'qct'/rfjqa fisdaqfinCovatv dg tjjv nqdg rqv firjziqa ai
rov, 8co8sxaernvg 'ovrng, dndxqiaiv oi'/ o'idare on iv rolg rov
Harqdg finv del fie eivat; (Luke ii. 49.) ov oi'/ y8eiaav, cpaat,
Hariqa '/ar'yyysXXsv airolg' '/at 8id rovrn s'/nifixpat rnvg fia-
dqrdg sig rdg 8w8exa cpvXdg, '/yqvaaovzag rdv dyvwarov airolg
Qedv. Kat rip elndvn aircp, di8da'/aXe dyadi, rev dXydwg dya
ddv Qedv wfinXnyy/ivat elnnvra, ri fis Xiysig dyaddv; etg effTtv
ayai^og, 6 Haryq iv rnig oiqavolg (Mat. xix. 16), x.r.X.
Hippol. Bef. Haer. VI. 42. p. 306. Kat sivat rovrovg fioq-
qpag, ag 6 Kiqiog dyyiXovg e'lqyxs, rag diyvsxdg ^Xsnoiaag rd
nqdawnov roi Harqdg. (Mat. xviii. 10.)
Prepon (Marcionite).
Hippol. Bef. Haer. VII. 31. (p. 396.) 'Qg avrdg bfioXoysl ri fie
xaXslg dyaddv; (Luke xvhi. 19; Mark x. 18.)
11. Docetae.^
ST MATTHEW, &C.
Hippol. Bef. Haer. VIII. 9. (p. 416.) Kal roiro eivat do-
'/oiaiv OVTOI rd XeXeyfiivov vnd rov 2wrfqog' 'E^yXdev b ansi-
' Docetae. Though what is called Docetism was au ordinary tenet of Gnos
ticism, there seeras to have been in tbe second century a special sect bearing the
narae of Docetae, They believed that our Lord inhabited a huraan body ; but that
under it he had another and more spiritual frarae which be retained when he left
the earthly forra nailed to the cross. Uncertainty as to the date of this sect
makes it useless to dwell upon their quotations. Clera. Alex, Strom, III, 13 says
they were founded by Julius Cassianus, a pupil of Valentinus. Serapion (Eus. H,
E. VI, 12) says that they used a book called the Gospel of Peter, This was in
A.D. 190. References to Colossians ii. 11, 14, 15, and to 2 Cor. v. 3 may be found
in Hippol, Eef. Haer. VIII, 10. Reference may be here made to other informa
tion supplied by Hippolytus.
Mouoimus, an Araliian (of uncertain date), who seeras (Hippol. VIIL 12) to
refer to John i, in his quotation of to eZpyijaevov ^v Tat; ypacpaf;- 'Hv xal i'^i-
VETO, and who quotes Col. i, 19; ii. 9 (Hippol. VIH. 13), He is mentioned by
Theodoret, Fab. I, 18. Saturnilus (in Irenaeus, B. I, 24, 1 called Saturninus) was

426 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
qiov rov anstqai, '/at [to] nsadv sig t^v yfjv t^v '/aXyv
dyad-fjv snoiet o fiiv sxardv, o di E^fjYt,ovTa, o 8i rqid-
xovra. Kat 8td rovro s'iqy/i, cpyatv '0 sywv wra d'/ov-
etv axovirco, on ravra oi'/ 'dart ndvnov d'/oiajiara. (Mat.
xiii. 3, 8, 9; Mark iv. 3, 8, 9; Luke viii. 5, 8.)
Ibid. VIII. 10. (p. 420.) Kal sl dsXsrs 8i^aadat, avrdg
iartv 'HXiag b fiiXXcov eq'yeadai. '0 e'^wv cora d'/ovsiv
d'/ovETw. (Mat. xi. 14, 15.)
Ihid. {p. 422.) Tovrd ian , cpyatv, o Xiysi 6 2orz'yq ' 'Ed v fiy
rig yswydfj s§ vdarog xat nvsi ftarog, oix slasXsi-
asrat elg rfjv (iaaiXeiav rdiv ovqavdv 'dn rd ysysvvy
fiivov ex T^g ffapxog adq§ iartv. (John iii. 5, 6.)
12. Theodotus.^
THEODOTUS ftTTOTED BY CLEM. ALEX.
Theodoti Epitomae (Dindorf's Ed. of Clem. Alex. Vol. HI.
p. 424, &c.), c. 6. (John's Gospel used hy the Valentinians) Td
of Antioch in Syria, and taught the usual doctrine regarding the evil of matter,
the sin of marriage, and the mission of Christ to deliver men from the God of
the Jews. Hippolytus repeats Irenaeus's account of him almost verbatim,
• Theodotus, In explanation of our extracts from " Theodotus " it is neces
sary to prefix some notes. There were several of this name. The chief of them
seems to have been a native of Byzantium, a tanner, who was excommunicated
by Victor of Eome, Another, a banker, is said by Eusebius, H, E. V. 28, to have
been a foUower of his namesake. Hippol, Eef. Haer. VII. 35, 36, mentions both,
Epiphanius, Haer. 54 (B. I, t. 2), speaks of Theodotus the tanner as the founder
of a sect — the Theodotians. He speaks of this sect as a successor of the sect of
the Alogi who denied John's Gospel. The story is that Theodotus — in some un
defined persecution — denied Christ, and afterwards (in Eome to which he had fled)
alleged that he had not denied God but Christ, a man. His arguments accordingly
went to prove the mere humanity of Jesus Christ, and to cover the denial of his
supernatural birth. But it is quite clear that this description, though it raay bo
reconciled with Eusebius, does not apply to the person naraed by Hippolytus, who
taught that Jesus was born of a virgin, and that Christ carae from heaven, like
a dove, upon hira at his baptism. The views recorded in Hippolytus resemble
those of Cerinthus. To which of those men do the extracts appended to the works
of Clera, Alex, belong? Their title is 'Ex tuv ©eoSotou xal tt]; avaToXix'^; xa-
Xou|ji£vif); 8iSaaxoXia; xard tou; OuaXEvrfvou f_p6w\i<; i-KixoiMl. For /po'vou; it has
been suggested to read aiuva;. The extracts seem to have been made by Clement
for his own use, and entered in a commonplace book. When they are studied
they seem to be the work of a Valentinian ; and, therefore, apparently of a Theo
dotus different from those named before. The date of his writing is uncertain ;
but as being between the times of Valentinus and Clement, it may be put down
for the beginning of the last quarter of the seeond century. We have given ex
tracts showing the very numerous quotations of Scripture to be found in the pas-

THEODOTUS. 427
"ev dq-yfj yv 6 ^lo'yog, .xat o Xdyng yv nqdg rdv Qsdv, '/at Qsdg yv
n Xdyng," nl dno OiaXevrivnv ovzcog ixdiyovrai. 'Aqyfjv fiiv ydq
rdv fiovoyevfj Xiyovaiv, x.r.X.
THE GOSPELS ftUOTED.
Ihid. C. 9. 'H niang oi fiia, dXXd didcpoqog. 'O yovv Acoryq
cpqat' "I'evydyzw aot '/ard tjjv niariv" (Mat. ix. 29) 0,9-ev et-
pj/Ttti TOt'g fiiv rfjg xXyaswg dvdqwnovg '/ard tj)v naqovaiav rov
avriyqiarov nXavydrjasadai ' ddivarov di rovg cxiexTot'g- 8id cpyat
"¦/at sl dvvardv, rovg s'/Xsxroig fiov." (Mat. xxiv. 24.) HdXtv
'orav Xiyy, "i^sXdsrs sx roi o'lxov roi Harqdg fiov" (John ii. 16),
TOtg x^jjTOfg Xiyst' rcdXtv np i^ dnody ftiag iXddvrt '/at x.aTsdq-
doxdri rd vndqyovra, cp rdv airevrdv e'dvaev fidayov (Luke xv.
23), TIJV '/Xfjaiv Xiyet, xat onov b §aaiXevg sig to dslnvov rov
ydfiov roig iv ralg bSolg -/ixXy/sv (Mat. xxii. 9). Hdvrsg ftiv
ovv xi'/Xyvrat in' I'aqg' ^qEyet ydq int 8t'/aiovg '/at d8ixovg, '/at
rdv yXtov S7tiXdfinsi ndatv (Mat. v. 45) i'/Xiynvrat di ol fidX
Xov ntarsvaavreg, nqdg ovg Xiyet "rdv Hariqa fiov oidetg swq-
a-/sv sl fifj 6 vidg'" (John i. 18) xat "vfislg iars rd cpdg rov
xdafiov" (Mat. v. 14) '/at " Hdrsq dyis, dyiaaov iv np dvdfiari
aov." (John xvii. 11.) THE EPISTLES OF PAUL.
Ihid. c. 10. Kat b fiiv cpdg dnqdairov etqyrat, tog fiovo-
yevqg xat nqwrdro'/og, a dcpdaXfidg oix elde '/at ovg oi'x
sages preserved (apparently by Cleraent), And following thera we have given
sorae extracts from Epiphanius, showing the passages of Scripture on which (ac
cording to hira) Theodotus the tanner relied. It seems hopeless to try to reconcile
the stateraents of Hippolytus, Eusebius, and Epiphanius, &c,, regarding the form of
Cerinthianisra or Ebionisra professed by this Theodotus. Lipsius (p, 236) throws
Hippolytus ("Pseudo-Origen") overboard, and inserts a negative in the text of
Pseudo-Tertullian, in order to make the accounts agree. But this is a strong
measure. Cave (Hist. Lit, p. 54) tries to blend the authorities in his tirao, but
only makes a mosaic wbich is independent of them all. The second Theodotus (the
banker) is said to have founded the sect of Melchizedekians, declaring that Christ
was inferior to Melchizedek (see Hippol. Eef Haer. VII, 36 ; Pseudo-Tert. c, 38).
That sect, of course, founded on Hebrews v. 6; vi. 20; vii. 17. For a suggestion
of difficulties about Theodotus, without clearing them up, see Dindorf's Clem. Alex.
IV. p. 462. The passages given in our text are only specimens ; but they contain
references to the Gospels, Pauline Epistles (Eom., Cor., Gal., Eph., Phil., Col.,
1 Tira.), and 1 Peter. Thc passages in Epiphanius refer to Mat,, Luke, John,
Acts, 1 Tim,

428 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
y'/nvasv, oidi int '/aq8iav dvdqdnnv dvi§y. (1 Tim. vi.
16; ICor. ii. 9.)
Ihid. c. 14. Kat ol dyysXot acofiard slaiv bqdvrat yovv.
AXXd '/at fj xpvyfj adfia. '0 yovv dndaroXog " ansiqsTai fiiv ydq
adfia xpvyt'/dv, iysiqsrat di adfia nvEvfiart'/dv." (1 Cor. xv. 44.)
Ihid. c. 19. Eira snicpiqsi " nqwrdro'/og ndayg '/riaswg. "
A oqarov fiiv ydq Qsov slxdva rdv Xdyov roi iv ravrdrrjzi,
n qcordro'/ov di ndaqg '/riaswg yswydstg dnaddg, '/riarqg
xat ysvsaidqyyg rfjg liXyg iyivsro '/riaswg rs '/at oia tag. 'Ev ainp
ydq b Haryq rd ndvra inoiyasv odsv '/at fioqcpfjv dovXov
XaXslv s'iqyzat ov fidvov t^v adq'/a xard rfjv naqovaiav, aXXd
di rfjv oiaiav ix toC vnoxsifiivov. (Col. i. 15; Phil. ii. 7.)
Ihid. c. 22. Kal orav s'iny 6 ayroffToAog "inst rt notfjaov-
aiv ol ^anrtl^dfisvoL vniq rdv vE'/qdv;" vniq fjfidv ydq, cpyatv,
ol dyyeXoi i^anriaavro, wv iofiiv fiiqy. (1 Cor. xv. 29.)
Ibid. c. 4A. Aid rovrov roi fivaryqiov b HavXog xeXevet rdg
yvval'/ag cpoqelv e^ovaiav int rfjg '/scpaXr g did roig dy
yiXovg. (1 Cor. xi. 10.)
Ihid. c. 49. Elnev 6 dndaroXog vnerdyy ry fiaraidryn rov
'/dajiov oiy sxwv, dXXd did rdv vnord^avra, in iXnidt, on xat
avrdg iXsvdsqwdyasrai , orav avXXsyy rd ansqfiara rov Qeov.
(Rom. viii. 20, 21.)
Ihid. c. 85. Asl ovv dnXiadai rolg 'xvqta'/olg bnXotg, s'yovrag
rd adfia xat rfp> xpvyyv drqwrov, bnXoig a^iaat rd §iXy rnv
dta^dXov dvvafiEvotg, wg yjjfftv 6 ayro'ffTO^og. (Eph. vi. 16.)
THE EPISTLES OF PAUL AND PEIEB.
Ibid. c. 86. Kat rd dXoya ^ipa 8td acpqayl8og 8ei'/vvat rivog
iariv s'/aarov, xat ex T^g acpqayl8og ixdixslrat. Ovrwg xat ^
xpvxy V ^'"^¦^^ ^d T^g aXydsiag Xaiovaa acpqdytOfia rd ariyfiara
rov Xqiaroi nsqicpiqst. (Gal. vi. 17.) Ovroi slatv rd nai8ia rd
ij8q iv rfj '/oiry awavanavdjisva (Luke xi. 7), xat al naqdivoi
al cpqdvtfioi, (Mat. xxv. 1) atg al Xotnal al fiiXXovaat oi aw-
stafjXdnv rd fjrnifiaa fiiva ayadd, sig a intdvfioiaiv dyysXot na-
qa'/ixpai. (1 Pet. i. 12.) THE EPISTLE OF PETEE.
Ihid. c. 12. Odg di vnsqdv fj fisyiary nqo'/onfj dnd rov vos-

THEODOTUS. APELLES. 429
qoi nvqdg ano'/s'/adaqfiivov riXsov, s'tg a inidvftovaiv dyysXoi
naqa'/vxpai, b Hirqog cpqaiv (IPet. i. 12) 6 di vldg sn roirov
'/adaqcorsqog anqoairnv cpdg '/at divafiig Qsni, xat '/ard rdv
anoaroXov rifiico '/at dfidfii^ '/at daniXcj) a'ifiazi iXvrqcodqfisv
o'v rd fiiv Ifidria dg cpCJg 'sXafixpev, rd nqdawnov di wg 6 yXiog,
tp firj8i dvnonqaat iart Qi^8lcog. (IPet. i. 19; Mat. xvii. 2.)
THEODOTUS QUOTED BY EPIPHANIUS.
Epiph. Haeres. II. t. 1. h. 54. p. 463. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 964.)
"Ori, cpqaiv, n Xqiardg s'cpq ' Nvv ds fis tyrslrs dnoxrslvai,
dvdqconov og rfjv dXijdsiav vfilv XsXdXy/a' bqdg, cpqatv,
'on dvdqiondg iartv. (John viii. 40.)
Ihid. p. 464. Elrd cpqat fiqdi dfiaqriav nsnoiy/ivat dqvrjad-
fievnv rdv Xqiarnv, airov, cpyat, rov Xqtarov elndvrog ndaa
^Xaacpyfiia dcpedyaerai rolg dvdqdnotg, '/at 6 Xiycov
Xdyov sig rdv vldv rov avdqdnov acpsdya srat avrip.
(Mat. xii. 31.)
Ihid. p. 465. Eira, cpyat, '/at aird rd siayyiXiov s'cpy rfj
Maqicx nvevfia Kvqiov ineXeiaerat ini ae' Kat ovx ems
nvsi fia Kvqinv yevfjaerat iv ani' did i'/ navrayodev cptXo-
vsi'/dv 6 dvdyrog dvdqwnog i/ninrei rfjg dXqdeiag. (Luke i. 35.)
Ibid. p. 467. 'AXXd, cpqatv, elnov ol dndaroXot, dvdqa
dno8e8eiyfiivov elg vfidg ayfieioig xatrsqaai. (Acts
ii. 22) '/at oi'/ slnov Qsdv dnodsdstyfiivov. 'EXiyyy di ndXiv,
Oeddore, on ndXtv ol airoi dndaroXot iv ralg airalg Hqd^satv
'scpqaav, dg b fiaxdqiog ^ricpavdg cpyaiv Idoi, bqd rdv ov
qavdv dvEcoyfiivov, '/at rdv vldv roi avdqwnov ex de-
lidv rov Qeoi. (Acts vii. 56.)
Ibid. HdXtv di nqnipaaiCerat Xiywv on scpy nsqt airoi 6
a/roffToylog OTi fisairyg Qsov xat dvdqdncov dvdqwnog,
Xqiardg 'Iqaovg, '/at oi'/ olds ndg ndXiv '/ad' savrov ine-
ysiqsi. (1 Tim. ii. 5.)
13. Apelles.^
Itippol Bef. Haer. X. 20. (p. 524.) 'AnsXXyg di b roirov fia
drjzfjg dnaqsadstg zolg vnd roi 8i8aa'/dXov slqqfiivoig, '/add
' ApeUes was a follower of Marcion, but not a close imitator, Tertullian

430 TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.
nqnsinofiev , aXXqi Xoyco vnidero riaaaqag sivai Qeovg, cov sva
cpda'/si [^ayaddv^, ov ovrs ol nqocpfjzat syvwaav, ov sivat vldv
rdv Xqiardv.
Jerome, Prooem. in Mat. See before, p. 99. (Apelles the
author of a Gospel)
Origen, ep. ad charos suos in Alexandr. (Rufini de Adult.
Orig. Migne, Vol. VII. p. 626.) Videte, quali purgatione dispu
tationem nostram purgavit, tali nempe, quali purgatione Marcion
Evangelia purgavit vel apostolum; vel quasi successor ejus post
ipsum Apelles, Nam sicut illi subverterunt Scripturarum veri
tatem, sic et iste, sublatis quae vere dicta sunt, ob nostri cri-
minationem inseruit quae falsa sunt.
Epiph. Haeres. I. t. 3. h. 44. p. 381. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 824.)
Xqiardv di y/stv cpyg in' iaydrwv rdv '/aiqdv, vldv 'dvra roi
dvw dyadov Qeov, '/at rd dytov avrov Hvevfia waavrwg int ffw-
ryqice rdv elg yvdaiv avrov iqyo fiivwv '/at iXdovra ov 8o'/yaet
nscpyvivat, dXXd iv dXydsicx adq'/a slXycpivat, ov/ dnd Maqiag
rfjg Haqdivov, dXXd dXydivfjv jiiv iayrjxivat rfjv adq'/a '/at aHfia,
o'irs dnd aniqfiarog dvdqdg, ovrs dnd yvvat'/dg naqdivnv, dXX'
toys fiiv adqxa dXydivyv roircj) rip rqdncj). Kai cpyaiv 'Ev np
sqysadat dnd twv inovqaviwv, yXdsv s'tg t^v yyv, '/at awyyayev
savfzw dnd rdv reaadqwv arotxeiwv aio fia. . . . and ydq rov ^q-
qov rd ^yqdv, xat and rov deqfiov rd deqfidv, '/at and rov vyqov
(de Praescr. Haer, c, 30) says that for incontinence he incurred Marcion's dis
pleasure, and left Rome for Alexandria. The story is doubtful. In his old age
iie was a man of high character at Rome (ttjv itoXiTEfav aepLVUvd{XEvo; xol to y^-
pa;) when Rhodon opposed him (Eus. H, E, V, 13), This being in the reign of
Commodus (a,d, 192), Apelles must have been in his manhood when Marcion
was in Rome, Jerome's statement that he was the author of a Gospel may be
explained by his reverence for the "Revelations of Pbilumene" ($avEp(oaEi; 4't-
Xou(JiEViQc), a prophetess and prestidigitator who accompanied him. It is said (Tert,
1, c.) that Apelles himself wrote them down as he learned thera frora her. He
denied Christ's birth of a virgin. He taught that good works are indispensable to
saving faith in Christ crucified (Eus, 1, c). See some of Tertullian's references to
Apelles at pp. 46, 48, His relation to the canonical Scriptures is obscure. He
probably accepted our Gospels, but denied their exclusive authority; and believed
in the continued inspiration of men and women by the Holy Spirit, But he was
only a heretic in n, mild sense; his heresy being that he believed the Maker of
the world to have made it to the glory of the supreme God who is Lord and self-
existent, and that the supreme God sent Christ in tbe fulness of time to amend
the world, Hippolytus (1. c.) affirms that he held by a succession of four Gods.
But Epiphanius, Haer. 44 (quoted in our text), confirms Origen. See a very full
account of Apelles in Lardner, IV, p, 639,

APELLES. JULIUS CASSIANUS. THE EBIONITES. 431
TO vyqov, xat dnd rov xpvyqnv rd xpvyqdv. Kat o'irwg nXdaag
eavrcp adfia, dXqdtvdg nicpyvev iv '/dofic^, xat idida^sv fjfidg
rfjv dvw yvioaiv, xaracpqnvslv te rnv Ayfiiovqyov, xat dqvsiadat
airov rd s'qya' vnodsi^ag fjfilv iv nnicf Tqacpfj nold san rd
cpvast £§ avTOi; siqyfiiva, xat nnld ian rd dnd rov Ayfiiovqyov.
O'irwg ydq, q)rjaiv, 'scpq 'sv toj EiayyeXicij' liveade d ox t fiot
rqaneCtrai.^ Xqdfiat ydq, cpyaiv, dnd ndayg Fqaqtrjg dva-
Xiycov rd yq-rjaifia. Eira cprjatv "Edw/ev b Xqtazdg savrdv na
dslv iv airip rep adfiart, xat iaravqddy iv dXydsia, xat
Irdcpq iv dXydsiijc, xat dviaryasv iv dXydeicf, '/at 'edei^ev airfjv
rqv adq'/a rolg savrov fiadqralg. Kat dvaXvaag, cpyatv, airfjv
rqv ivavd-qwnyaiv savzov, dnsftiqias ndXtv sxdarcj) rdv aroi-
ysiwv rd 'idiov dnn8ovg, rd dsqfidv np dsqfiip, rd xpvyqdv np
'^i-'XQ't'y ^0 ^yqdv np ^yqcp, rd vyqdv rip vyq^' xat owwg dia-
Xvaag an avrov naXtv rd svaaq'/ov adfia, avinry sig rdv oi
qavov, odsv '/at fj'/£.
Ibid. p. 385. El di xat a fioiXst Xaji^dvetg dnd T^g deiag
Fqacpfjg, '/at a (iovXsi xaraXtfindvetg' dqa yovv 'xqiryg nqoe'/adi-
aag, oiry eqfiyvsvrfjg rdv vdficov, dXXd ixXoysvg rdv oi '/azd rdv
vovv aov yqacpsvrwv, dXXd 'dvrcov fiiv dXydivdv, naqd aoi di fis-
ranoujdivrwv xpEv8dg, '/at '/ard rdv vovv T^g ff^g dndryg, '/at
riov vnd aov yrcary fiivwv.
14. Julius Cassianus.
Clem. Alex. Strom. III. 13. p. 553. 'Hy slrat di 6 ysvvalog
ovrog HXarwvixdreqov deiav ovaav rfjv xpvyyv dvwDsv inidvfiicx
dyXvvdslaav dsvqo y'/siv sig yivsaiv xat cpdoqdv. Avrixa (iid-
l^srai rdv HavXov ex T^g dndryg tjjv yivsaiv awsardvat Xiysiv
did TOVTCOV "cpn^oifiai di fifj dg 6 'dcpig Evav i^qndnjasv cpd-aqjj
rd voTjfiara vfidv dnd rfjg dnXdryrng T^g eig tov Xqiarcjv. "
(2 Cor. xi. 3.) 15. The EiiiONiTEs.^
Iren. B. I. 26. 2. Qui autem dicuntur Ebionaei consentiunt
quidem mundum a Deo factum; ea autem, quae sunt erga Do-
2 See before, p. 82, Note 1.
* The Ebionites were Jewish Christians holding by the Law. Epiphanius is

432 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
mirium, non similiter ut Cerinthus et Carpocrates opinantur. Solo
autem eo, quod est secundum Matthaeum, Evangelio utuntur et
apostolum Paulum recusant, apostatam eum legis dicentes.
Ihid. B. IIL 11. 7. See before, p. 67.
Ihid. B. III. 15. 1. Eadem autem dicimus iterum et his, qui
Paulum apostolum non cognoscunt, quoniam aut reliquis verbis
Evangelii, quae per solum Lucam in nostram venerunt agnitio
nem, renuntiare debent, et non uti eis; aut si ilia recipiunt
omnia, habent necessitatem recipere etiam eam testificationem,
quae est de Paulo, dicente ipso, primum quidem Dominum ei de
coelo locutum: Saule, Saule, quid me persequeris? &c.
Hippol. Bef Haer. VII. 34. (p. 406.) (Compare also VII. 8, 9 and
X. 22.) E^twvalot di bjioXoyovat ftiv rdv '/dofinv -vnd rov 'ovrcog
Qsov ysyovivat, rd 8i nsqt rdv Xqtardv bfioiwg rqi Kqqivdcji '/at
Kaqno'/qdrst fivdeiovaiv. "Edeatv'lovdai/olg twat, xard vdfio-y cpd-
a'/ovreg dixaiovadai, '/at rdv 'iqaovv Xiyovrsg 8E8ixaidadai nozq-
aavra rdv vdfiov did xat Xqiardv airdv rov Qsov lovofidadai,
'/at lyaovv, inet fiydetg rcfiv [eTe^iwv] iriXeas rdv vdfiov sl ydq
'/at 'srsqog Ttg nsnoifj/si rd iv vdfiip nqoazsray fiiva, yv dv
ixslvog 6 X^tffTog. Avvaadat di xat savroig bfioiiog notyaavrag
Xqiarovg ytviadat' '/at ydq '/at airdv bfioiwg dvdqwnov eivat
ndat Xiyovatv.
Eus. H. E. IIL 27. (See to the same effect, V. 8.) Obrot
di zov fiiv dnoardXov ndaag rdg iniaroXdg dqvyrsag fjyovvro
eivat dslv, anoardrqv anoxaXovvrsg avrdv rov vdfiov, evayy e-
Xicp di fidvcj) rip xad' 'E^qaiovg Xeyofiivep yqdfievot twv Xot
ncov Ofii'/qdv snoiovvro Xdyov. Kat rd fiiv ad^^azov '/at rfjv
dXXyv 'lovdaixfjv dywyfjv bfioiwg ixeivoig naqecpiXarrov , ralg 8'
av '/vqta'/alg fjfiiqatg yjilv rd naqanX-qata elg fivfjfiyv Trjg rov
Kvqiov dvaardaewg ineriXovv. "Odev naqd rfjv roiairyv iyyei-
qqaiv rfjg roida8e XeXdyyaat nqoayyoqiag, rov 'E^twvaiwv dvdfia-
the earliest authority for distinguishing between Ebionites and Nazarenes as two
distinct Jewish sects. In earlier usage all Christians were called Nazarenes by
their Jewish neighbours ; all Jewish Christians were called Ebionites in the Chris
tian Church. In this sense Irenaeus, Origen, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and even Eu
sebius, speak of Ebionites, though varied Christological views were known to exist
among them, (Eus, II, E, III, 27,) See Introduction: "Gospel of Hebrews."
Compare Lightfoot's Galatians, p, 305, and Lipsius, Zur Quellen-Kritik des Epi
phanius, p. 122,

THE EBIONITES. 433
TOg, TJJV T^g diavniag nnoyeiav airwv vnocpaivovrng' ravry ydq
i.ni'/Xqv 6 nrwyng rraq' 'E^qaioig bvojtdterat.
Ihid. VI. 17. Tdv ye fiyv Eqfiyvsvrdv aizdv dfj rnvzcov laziov,
'E§iwvalnv rdv 2vfifiayov ysyovivat. A'iqeaig di iaziv fj rdv
'Epicovaiwv n'vrw '/aXovfiivq, rdiv rdv Xqiardv i^ 'iwafjcp '/at Ma
qiag ysyovivat cpaa'/dvrwv, xpiXdv zs dvdqconov vcpstXqcpdzcov ai
rdv, -/at rdv vdfiov "yqfjvai 'lovdaixcorsqov cpvXdrrsiv dniayvqt^o-
fiivcov, wg nov '/at ex T^g nqoadsv larnqiag syvcofisv. Kat vnn-
fivfjfiara 8i rov 2vfi fidyov slain vvv cpiqsrai, iv otg 8n'/sl nqdg
rd '/ard Mardalnv dnnrsivdfisvog siayyiXiov, rfjv dsdyXwfiivqv
a'iqsaiv '/qarvvsiv ravra di b 'Qqtyivqg, fisrd xat dXXcov sig rdg
yqacpdg sqfiyvsidv rnv 2vfifid'yov, aqfiaivsi naqd 'lovXiavfjg nvdg
slXycpivai, rjv '/ai cpqat naq' avrov Hvfifidyov rag ^ifiXovg dta-
8i^aadat.^ Epiph. Haer. I. t. 2. h. 30. p. 127. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 409.)
See before, p. 139.
Lbid, H8y 8i nnv '/ai rtvsg ndXtv 'dcpdaaav '/at dnd rfjg
EXXyvi'/yg diaXi'/rov rd '/ard 'icodvvyv fisraXrjcpdiv sig 'Efiqatda
sficpsqsadat iv rolg rcov 'lovdaiwv yatocpvXa'/ioig , cpyfit di rolg
sv Ti^sqiadi, '/at ivanoxsladat iv dnoxqicpotg, dg nvsg rdv dnd
Invdaiwv nsniarsv/nnov vcpyyqaavrn fjfilv '/ard Xsnrdrrjza' oi
fiqv aXXd '/at rdiv Hqd^scov rdv 'AnoardXcov rfjv fii^Xov waaircog
and EXXddog yXdaaqg sig 'E^qatda fisrafiXydslaav Xdyog syst
S'/slas '/sladat sv rolg yatocpvXaxioig , dg xat dnd roirov roig
avayvovrag lovdaiovg roig fjfiiv vcpyyyaafiivovg s'tg Xqtardv ne-
niarev/ivai. Ihid. p. 140. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 432.) Hqd^eig 8e dXXag
'/aXovaiv anoardXcov sivat, iv aig noXXd rfjg das^siag airwv
s'finXsa, svdsv oi naqiqywg xard rfjg dXqdeiag savrovg wnXt-
aav. Ava/iadfioig di rtvag '/at vcpyyrjasig dfjdsv iv rolg dva^a-
dfiolg la'/d^ov vnoridsvrai , dg i^yyovfiivov xard rs rov vadv
'/at TcDv dvaidv, '/ard rs rov nvqdg rov iv rep dvaiaaryqicij,
2 Did Symmachus oppose Matthew's Gospel in order to confirm the Ebionite
position; or did he use it for that purpose? What raeans aTCOTEivop-EVo;? Jerorae
says that Symmachus wrote a Commentary on Matthew's Gospel ; how then could
he oppose it? May it not be that, in so far as the genuine St Matthew came
short of the Ebionite doctrines, this Partisan-Commentator opposed it, and thereby
established to his own satisfaction the worth of the passages peculiar to the Ebionite
form of tlie book? 28

434 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
'/at dXXa noXXd '/svocpwviag sfinXsa, wg '/at rov HavXov sv
ravda '/aryyoqovvrsg oi'/ ala'yivnvrat ininXdaroig nat rfjg twv
xpsvdanoardXwv airdv '/a'/ovqyiag '/at nXdvyg Xdyotg nsnotyfis-
voig' Taqaia fiiv airdv, dg airdg bfioXoysl '/at ov/ aqvslrat,
Xiyovrsg. 'E^ 'EXX'ijvwv 8i airdv vnor'idsvrai, Xa^dvrsg t^v nqo-
cpaaiv ex toi; rdnov did rd cptXdXydsg in airov qqdsv, ozt
" Taqasig slfit, oi'/ darjfiov ndXswg noXiryg." (Acts xxiv. 39.)
Eira cpda'/ovaiv airdv sivat "EXXyva, '/at 'EXXyvidog fiyrqdg xat
"EXXyvog narqdg nalda, dva^s§y/ivai 8i sig 'IsqoadXvfia '/at yqo
vov i'/sl fisfisvy/ivat , intrsdvfiy/ivat di dvyariqa rov Isqiwg
nqdg ydfiov dyayiadat , '/at roirov svs'/a nqoarjXvrov ysviad-at
xat nsqiTfiydfjvat, '/at fiy/in Xa^dvra r-qv roiairyv '/dqyv wq-
yiadai, '/at '/ard nsqirojifg ysyqacpivat '/at '/ard aa§§drov xai
vo//o^£ffiag. 16. The Montanists or Cataphrygians. ^
Hippol. Bef Haer. VIIL 19. (Comp. X. 25, 26.) '^Te^ot di
'/at airot alqsrt'/WTEqot rfjv cpvatv, Oqvysg rd yivog, nqoXycpdiv-
rsg vnd ywaiwv yndryvrat, HqtaxiXXyg nvdg xat Ma^ifiiXXyg
'/aXovfiivwv, ag nqocprjzidag vofii^ovaiv, iv ravraig rd naqd'/Xyrov
nvsvfia xsywqyxivai Xiyovrsg, '/ai nva nqd airdv Movravdv
bfioiwg do^d^ovaiv dg nqoipyryv, cbv ^i^Xovg dnsiqovg syovrsg
jcXavwvrai, fzfjzs rd in awcSv XeXaXyjiiva Xdycji xqivavzeg, fiqre
rolg '/qlvat dvvafiivotg nqoaiyovreg, dXX' d'/qirwg rfj nqdg av-
' Montanus proclaimed at Pepuza in Phrygia (about a.d, 150, Gieseler) that
the power of the Paraclete in the Church was to be perfected in his time. His
seems to have been the longing for the perfection of the Church of Christ which
from his day to Edward Irving's has influenced so raany men of the highest ear
nestness. It was not to be expected that in Phrygia any form of religious enthu
siasm would be kept within bounds. And accordingly Montanus and two pro
phetesses, Maximilla and Priscilla, clairaed to have received special revelations.
They adhered to the Christian creed, and to the Christian Canon (see Hippol. in
our text), but in their zeal added new strictness to various practical observances.
They " prescribed new and rigorous fasts, forbade second marriage, ascribed ex
traordinary value to celibacy and raartyrdom, raanifested profound conterapt for
everything earthly, and taught that incontinence, murder, and idolatry, though they
did not exclude frora the grace of God, shut a person for ever out of the Church. "
Gieseler, C, H,, Vol. I. p, 148 (Eng. Trans,). They also proclaimed the speedy
end of the world. They founded largely on the promises of the Paraclete in
John's Gospel, and for their strict discipline appealed to Heb. vi, 4, In his later
days Tertullian was a Montanist, In the Pseudo-Tert,, Adv. Haer, u, 7, is an ac
count of them: "Secundura Phrygas."

THE MONTANISTS. 435
roig niarei nqoacpiqovzai , nXeldv rt 8t' airdv cpdaxovzeg [dg']
fiefiadyxivai ^ ex vdfiov '/at nqocpjzdiv xat rdiv siayysXiwv. 'Yniq
8i ajroffToAovg xat ndv ydqiajia raira rd yivaia do^d^ovaiv, cog
roXfidv nXsldv n Xqiarov iv roiroig Xiysiv nvdg airdv ysyovi-
vai. Ovrot rdv fiiv nariqa rdv bXwv Qsdv xat ndvrcov xriaryv
Ofioiwg rfj ixxXyaiijt bfioXoyovat '/at 'daa rd eiayyiXiov neqt rov
Xqiarov fiaqrvqel, '/aivitovai di vqareiag '/at soqrdg xat ^yqo-
cpayiag '/at qacpavocpayiag cpdo'/ovrsg vnd rdiv yvvaiiov dsdiddydai.
Epiph.^ Haer. LL t. 1. h. 48. p. 402. (Migne,- Vol. I. p. 856.)
Ovrot ydq ol '/ard Wqiyag '/aXoifisvnt diyovrat ndaav yqacpfjv
naXaidv '/at viav 8iady/.qv, '/at vsxqcov dvdaraaiv bfioiwg Xi
yovat. Movravdv ds rtva nqocpfjzyv aiyovaiv systv xal Hqia'/iX-
Xav xat Ma^ifiiXXav nqocpyzidag' otg nqoaiyovrsg rdv vovv e|-
irqsxpav ' nsqt di Harqdg '/at Ylov xat 'Ayiov Hvsvfiarog bfioiwg
cpqovovat TJj dyicx xadoXtxjj i'/xXyaicjj, '/.r.X.
Tertull. de jejun. c. 1. Hi paracleto controversiam faciunt;
propter hoc novae prophetiae recusantur; non quod ahum Deum
praedicent Montanus et Priscilla et Maximilla, nec quod Jesum
Christum solvant, nec quod aliquam fidei aut spei regulam ever-
tant, sed quod plane doceant saepius jejunare quam nubere.
Iren. B. LU. 11. 9. See before, p. 69.=*
Jerome, Adv. Jovinian. B. LI. 3. (Vallars. Vol. II. p. 324.)
Et existimat aliquis secures, et dormientes nos esse debere post
baptismum ? iS'ecnon ad Hebraeos : Impossibile est enim eos qui
serriel sunt illuminati et gustaverunt donum coeleste, et participes
facti sunt Spiritus Sancti, gustaveruntque nihilominus bonum Bei
verbum, virtutesque saeculi futuri, et prolapsi sunt, renovari ite
rum ad poenitentiam, rursum crucifigentes sibimetipsis Filium
Dei, et ostentui habentes. (Heb. vi. 4, &c.) Certe eos qui illu
minati sunt, et gustaverunt donum coeleste, et participes facti
sunt Spiritus Sancti, gustaveruntque bonum Dei verbum, negare
non possumus baptizatos. Si autem baptizati peccare non pos
sunt, quomodo nunc Apostolus dicit, et prolapsi sunt? Verum
2 Epiphanius entitles his chapter KaTa tuv xaTa (tpuya;, ^Toi MovTavtaruv
xaXou^Evuv , T) xal Taaxo5pouyiTuv.
^ Irenaeus points probably to the Alogi as repudiating John's Gospel because
they did not admit the effusion of the Holy Spirit. See before, notes on pp. 69,
70. Bnt some refer the passage to the Montanists. 28*

436 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
ne Montanus, et Novatus hic rideant, qui contendunt non posse
renovari per poenitentiam eos qui crucifixerunt sibimet Filium
Dei, et ostentui habuerunt, consequenter hunc errorem solvit, et
ait: Confidimus autem de vobis dilectissimi meliora et viciniora
saluti, tametsi ita loquimur. Non enim injustus est Deus, ut oh-
liviscatur operis vestri et dilectionis, quam ostendistis in nomine
ipsius, qui ministratis Sanctis, et nunc ministratis. (Heb. vi. 9, 10.)
17. The AloglJ
Lren. B. LII. 11. 9. (See before, p. 69 and Notes,)
Eus. H. E. VII. 25. Dionysius says that "some" before his
day rejected the Apocalypse altogether. (See before, p. 346.)
Epiph. Haer. IL t. 1. h. 51. p. 423. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 892.)
Odo'/ovat roivvv ol "AXoyof rairyv ydq airolg intridrjfit r-fjv
in WW fiiav, dnd ydq Tijg devqo ovrwg '/Xydyaovrat' xat ovrwg, aya
nyrot, sniddfisv airolg 'dvo fia, rovrianv 'AXdycov. Eiyov ftiv
ydq rfjV a'iqsaiv xaXcrvfiivrjv, ano§dXXnvaav 'Iwdvvov rdg ^i^Xovg.
'Enst ovv rdv Xdyov oi diyovrat rdv naqd 'Iwdvvov '/s'/yqvy fisvov,
"AXoyoi xXyd-yaovrat. (See continuation, p. 354, 'AXXdrqtot '/.r.X)
lbid. p. 424. Hqocpaai^ovrai ydq ovrot alayvvdfisvoi dvri-
Xiysiv rip dyic^ 'Iwdvvy, did rd sldivat airoig xat airdv iv
dqtdfid rdv dnoardXwv ovra, '/at yyanyfiivov vnd rov Kvqiov,
og d^iwg rd fivanrjqia dns'/dXvnrsv '/at snt rd arfjdog airov
dvsnsae. Kat sriqcog aird dvarqinsiv nsiqcovrai. Aiyovai ydq
fifj elvai aird 'Iwdvvov, dXXd Kyqivdov. Kat oi'/ d^ta aird el
vai cpaaiv EV ExxXyaicx.
' Alogi. There is uo mention of the Alogi by narae in any author save Epi
phanius. His conteraporary Philastrius is the only author who gives a descriptioii
that can be applied to the same sect, Tbis bas led to grave doubts of there being
any such sect. Lardner gives an absolute denial of their existence, Volkmar, in
a work I have not seen, " Hippolyt und seine Zeitgenossen, " seems to take up the
same position. See Lipsius, Zur Quellen-Kritik des Epiphanies, p, 23. There are
some considerations, however, on the other side. Philastrius does not name the
sect, though he describes it, and this may indicate that he and Epiphanius drew
tbeir information from the sarae source, so that Epiphanius is original only in
giving the narae. The vague expressions of Irenaeus and of Dionysius in Eusebius
raay be made to apply to the Alogi, Ou the whole, and without going into de
tails, it seems probable that there were some objectors to the Johannine writings,
as a recoil from tbe extravagances of Montanism (e.g. Caius, see p, 343 and note),
and that Epiphanius more suo consolidated those scattered utterances into the ma
nifesto of a sect. Some of those mentioned by Epiphanius seem to have lived in
or near Thyatira.

THE ALOGI. 437
Ibid. Kat an avrfjg rfjg iTZifioXyg eidvg sXiyyovrai, fifjre a
aXiyovai vonvvreg ftyre neqt rivwv 8ia§e§aiovvrai. (1 Tim. i. 7.)
Hdg ydq earai Kyqivdov rd xard Kyqivdov Xiyovra; Kyqivdog
ydq 7tqdacpaT0v xal xptXdv rdv Xqiardv Xiyet dvdqwnov, b 8i
'icodvvyg aet 'dvra rdv Xdyov '/e'/rjqvye '/at dvwdev y/ovra, xat
aaqxwdivra. Ihid. p. 441. (The Alogi objected that the Gospel so soon
speaks of the marriage in Cana, omitting what other Gospels re
cord) Td di svayyiXiov rd sig 'dvnfia 'Icodvvov, cpaat, xpevderai.
Merd ydq rd einelv 6 Xdyog adq^ iyivero, xat nXiya rtvd,
eidig Xiyst on ydftog iyivsro iv Kav^ rfjg FaXtXaiag. Kat oi
fiifivyvrat ol dcpqoaivyv savrolg imandfievat dg 'iwdvvyg fisrd
rd slnslv rnv Xdynv adqxa ysyEvfjadai xat sa'/yvw/ivat iv fjfilv,
rovriariv dvdqconov ysyovivat, x.r.X.
Ihid. p. 444. (The Alogi ohjected that John speaks of two
Passovers, the others of one) Karyyoqovat di ol airot ndXtv roi
dyiov siayysXiarnv , fidXXnv 8i airnv roi EiayysXiov, on, cpa
atv, 6 'iwdvvyg s'cpy 8vo Hdaya rdv 2wryqa nenoiyxivat ev ne-
qin8q) iviavrdv 8io, ol 8s dXXni EiayysXiarat nsqt svdg Hdaya
dirjyoivrai, xat ovx I'aaaiv ol IdtiUzai on nv ftdvnv dvn Hdaya
bfioXoysl rd siayyiXia, dg navrayodev i8ei^afiev, aXXd 8io fiiv
nqdra Xiyet, xat aird di iv cp ninovdsv 6 2coryq, aX)t,o Hdaya,
dg slvai rqia Hdaya dnd rov yqdvov roi ^anriofiarog '/at rfjg
dqyqg roi '/yqiyfiarog int rqiatv srsaiv ewg rov aravqov.
Ihid. p. 454. (See before, p. 354, from cpda'/ovai)
Ihid. p. 455. (The Alogi objected to Apoc. ii. 18 fhat there
icas no Church in Thyatira) Elrd rtvsg i^ avrdv ndXtv snt-
Xafi^dvovrai roirov rov qyrov iv airy rjj 'Ano'/aXvxpsi, '/at cpd-
O'/ovatv dvr iXiy ovrsg 'dn sins ndXiv yqdxpov rep ayyiXc^r rfjg
i'/xXyaiag np iv Qvarsiqoig, '/at oir/ svt ixsl ix/Xyaia
Xqiariavcov sv Qvareiqoig. Hdg ovv eyqacpe tjj fifj ovay;^ Kat
evqiaxnvrat ol rntovTOi savrovg dvay/dl^ovrsg i§ aircov wv xy-
qirrovat '/ard rfjg dXydeiag bfioXoyelv. 'Edv ydq e'incoaiv, oix
svt vvv EX'/Xyaia sig Qvarsiqa, dstxviovat nqonscprjzsv/ivat rdv
'Icodvvyv. 'Evot'/yadvrwv ydq rovrwv i'/slas xat rdv '/ard Oqvyag
xat dlxqv Xi'/cov dqna^dvrwv rdg dtavoiag rdv dxsqaiwv nianov,
fisryvsy/av rfjv ndaav ndXiv sig rfjv airdv a'iqsaiv, ot rs dqvov-
fisvot rfjv 'Ano'/dXvxpiv '/ard rov Xdyov rovrov sig dvarqonfjv xar

438 TESTIMONIES OP HEEETICS.
S'/sivov '/aiqov iarqarsvovro. Nvv 8e 8id rdv Xqiardv iv np
"yqdvcj) rovrctj, fisrd yqdvov qt^' irdv, 'sartv fj i'/'/Xyaia '/at a'i^si,
xat dXXai nvig i'/slas rvyyavovat. Tors di y ndaa i'/'/Xyaia
i'/svwdy s'tg rfjv '/ard Oqiyag. Aid '/at sanovdaas rd 'Ayiov
Hvsvfia dnoxaXiipat fjfilv nwg yfisXXs nXavdad-at y i'/'/Xyaia
fisrd rdv yqdvov riov 'AnoardXcov, roi rs 'iwdvvov, '/at riov xad-
s^yg' og yv yqdvog fisrd rov 2wrfjqog avdXyxpiv, snt ivsvy/ovza
'/at rqiatv srsaiv, dg fisXXoiayg rfjg i'/slas i'//Xqaiag nXavdadai,
'/at yiovsvEad-at iv ry '/ard Oqvyag alqiast.
Ibid. p. 456. Kai cpaaiv 'on sldov, xat sins rip dyyiXijr,
Xvaov rovg riaaaqag dyyiXovg rovg int rov Evcpqdrov.
Kat y'/ovaa rdv dqidfidv rnv arqarov, fiiqtai fivqtd-
8sg, '/at yiXtat yiXtd8sg, xat yaav iv8s8vfiivoi dcoqa-
¦/ag nvqivovg '/at dsid8stg, '/at va'/ivdivovg. (Apoc.
ix. 14, &c.) 'Evdftiaav ydq ol roiovroi fiy ny dqa yiXoidv ianv
fj dXfjdsta. Philastr. de Haeres. (Ed. 1611) p. 27. Post hos (Chilione-
titas) sunt Haeretici, qui Evangelium secundum Joannem et Apo
calypsin ipsius non accipiunt et cum non intelligunt virtutem
scripturae, nec desiderant discere, in Haeresi permanent per-
euntes, ut etiam Cerinthi illius Haeretici esse audeant dicere.
Et Apocalypsin itidem, non beati Joannis Evangelistae et Apostoli,
sed Cerinthi Haeretici, qui tunc ab Apostolis beatis Haereticus
manifestatus, abjectus est ab ecclesia.
18. Clementine Homilies.^
Hom. II. 17. (Antichrist predicted) Ovrwg 8fj, wg 6 dXqdyg
fjfilv nqocp'Tjvyg s'iqy/sv, nqdrov xpsv8ig 8el iXdelv eiayyiXiov vnd
nXdvov nvdg, '/at eid ovrwg fierd '/adaiqeaiv roi dyiov rdnov
eiayyiXiov dXydig '/qicpa dianeficpdyvat elg inavdqdwaiv rdv
iaofiivwv alqiaecov' '/at fierd ravra nqdg rip riXet ndXiv nqcorov
'Avri'yqtarov iXdelv del, '/at rdre rdv 'ovrwg Xqtardv fjficov 'iq
aovv dvacpavfjvai , '/at fierd rnxrcov altoviov cpwrdg dvareiXavzog
7tdvza rd rov a'/drovg dcpavfj yeviadat. (1 John ii. 18.)

' For the principal passages bearing on John's Gospel, see before, pp. 184,
185, and "Introduction."

CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 439
Ihid. c. 19. (The Syrophcenician woman) 'lovara Ttg e'v
-qfilv ian ^vqocpoivixtaaa, rd yivng Xavaving, ^g to dvydrqiov
vnd yaXsnyg vnanv awsiysro, y '/at rip Kvqiii) fjfidv nqoaqXds
(iocoaa '/at I'/srsvovaa, '67Ccog airfjg rd dvydrqiov dsqansiay. '0
8i '/at vcp' fjfidv d^icodstg slnsv oi"/ s^sariv Idadat rd sdvy,
ini'/dra '/valv, did rd diacpdqnig yqyadat rqncpalg xal nqd^eaiv,
dnndsdnfiivyg T^g xaTa tjjv ^aaiXsiav rqaniCyg rolg vlnlg 'laqayX.
'H di rnvrn d'/nvaaaa, '/at T^g airyg rqani^yg, dg '/iwv, xptyicov
dnoninrdvnov avfiftsraXafi^dvsiv, fisradsfiivq 'dnsq yv, np bfioicog
dtairdadat rolg rfjg (iaaiXsiag vlnlg rqg sig t^v dvyariqa, cog
q^icoasv, s'rvysv Idascog. (Mark vii. 25-30. Comp. Mat. xv. 11-28.)
Ibid. c. 51. EiXdycog 6 didda'/aXog fjficov EXsysv yivsads rqa-
7iEL,lTat dd'/ifiot. (Hom. III. 50; XVIII. 20.)
Hom. III. 15. (Destruction of the Temple) Airi'/a yovv
nsqt rnv dyida fiarog nqnXiycov scpy 'Oqdrs rdg ol'/odofidg
rairag; dfiyv vfilv Xiyco, Xidog int Xidov oi ftfj dcpedy
code, og oi fiy '/aOaiqedfj' '/at oi fifj naqiXdy fj yeved
avry, '/at fj xadaiqsatg dqyfjv Xfjxpsrai. 'EXeiaovzat ydq '/at
'/adiovaiv ivzavda, '/ai neqiyaqa'/daovai, '/at rd ri'/va vfidv
ivraida '/araacpd^ovaiv. (Mat. xxiv. 2, 34; Luke xix. 43.)
Ibid. c. 18. (Scribes and Pharisees) 'AXX' oi'/ it^fjzqaag ri
vng iartv b T^g fiaaiXeiag yqdvog, rivog fj rfjg nqocpyrsiag xa-
didqa, 'xairot airov savrdv fiyviovrog np Xiysiv inl rfjg xa-
didqag Mwvaiwg i'/ddiaav ol Fqafiftarelg '/at ol Oa-
qtaalot' ndvra oaa Xiycoaiv V filv, a'/overe avrdv. (Mat.
xxiii. 2, 3, 14.) Aircov 8i elnsv cog r-qv xXsl8a T^g ^aatXsiag
nsniarsvfiivwv , jjTtg effTtv yvdatg, y fidvq tjjv niXyv rfjg ^coyg
dvot^at divarat, dt' fjg fidvyg s'tg rfjv alwviav 'Qwfjv slasXdslv
ianv. 'AXXd vat, cpyatv, -/qarovat fiiv tjjv /Xslv, rolg
di ^ovXofiivnig slasXdslv oi naqiyovatv. (Luke xi. 52.)
Ibid. c. 40. (Stewardship. Compare also c. 64.) 'Enst ovv
dsl nva bqiaat dvr' ifioi rdv ifidv dvanXyqovvra ronov, fii^
nqoaiqiast dsyddfisv roi Qeov ol ndvrsg, 'onwg rdv ovtwv ev
^jt(tv rdv '/qsLTTOva airdg nqddqXov noryay 'iva int T^g Xqiarov
'/adi8qag '/adsadstg rfjv airov i'/'/Xrjaiav sias^dg ol'/ovofijj. Tig
dqa bqiadyasrat; Qsoi ydq fiovXfj dva8sixvvraL jia'/dqiog n dv
dqwnog i'/slvog, ov '/araar'fjast b '/iqiog airov int rfjg dsqa-
nsiag nov avv8oiXcov avroi, rov 8L8dvaL airolg rdg Tqoq)dg iv

440 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
'/aiqip airdv, fry ivvooi fisvov '/at Xiyovra iv ry '/aq8icx avrov'
"yqovi^et b '/iqidg fiov iXdelv '/at dq^yrat ri7treiv roig avvdoi-
Xovg avrov, iadiwv xat niviov fierd re ndqvcov '/at fiedvdvrwv
'/ai y^et 6 xt'^tog rov doiXov i'/eivov iv wqa jj oi 7Cqoado'/ct, '/at
EV fjfiiqa JJ ov yivdo'/si, '/at dtyoroftyast airdv, '/at rd aniarnvv
airov fiiqog fisrd rdv vno'/qirdv d-qasi. (Mat. xxiv. 45, &C. ;
Luke xii. 42, &c.)
Ihid. c. 49. (Peter and Simon agree to regard Jesus as pre
dicted in Scripture) Kat b Hirqog scpy airi'/a iqd. liyqanrat
iv Tip nqcorcj) roi vdfiov ^t^Xicij nqdg rolg TsXsvraioig' "oi'/ ex-
Xsixpst dqywv i^ 'inida, ni8i fjyoi fisvog ex twv ftqqcov airnv, 'scog
dv s'Xdy ov sartv xat airdg nqoadnxia idvdv." (Gen. xlix. 10.)
Edv Tig ot'v TOV fisrd rd i^ 'lovda i'/Xslipat dqynvza '/at fjyov
fievov, iXyXvdnra, '/at vnd idvdv nqoa8oxdadai fiiXXovra, vofj
aai 8vvydjj, ovrog tjjv neqixonyv ex twv dnoreXeadivzcov dXyOq
rdv iXyXvddra iniyvdv ov ry dtdaa'/aXia netddfievog yvdaerai
nva iartv twv yqacpdv rd aXydfj, riva di rd xpevdfj. Kat b
^ificov awiyfit on rdv lyanfjv vfitov Xsysig, dg avrdv vnd rfjg
yqacpfjg nqncpyrsvdivra. Asddadco rniyaqnvv ovrcog s'ysiv. Aiys
roivvv ndg vfidg dia'/qivsiv rag yqacpdg i8i8a^Ev;
Ihid. c. 50. (Be careful in selecting Scripture) Kai 6 Hirqog '
on fiifii'/rai rd dXydfj rolg xpev8eaiv, fiifivqfiai nov airdv ai
nd fievov rovg 2addo'V'/aiovg slnslv "did rovro n Xav dads,
fifj slddrsg rd dXydfj twv yqacpdv, ov s'ivs'/sv dyvoslrs
rfjv divafiiv rov Qsov." (Mark xii. 24.) El di rd dXydfj rdv
yqacpdv dyvoslv airovg vni^aXsv, dfjXov wg 'dvrcov xpsvddv. 'AXXd
'/at iv rip cpdvai' " Fiveade rqane^irat dd'/ifiot," dg do'/ificov '/at
'/t§dyXwv Xdywv ovtwv '/at np einelv "did ri nv voelre rd sv
Xoyov rdv yqaipdJv;" Be^aidreqov rov aidaiqinog eiyvwfiovovv-
rog ridyaiv rdv vovv.
Ibid. c. 51. (The Law) Td di '/at einelv airnv "Ovx
fjXdov '/araXvaat rdv vdfiov" (Mat. v. 17), xat cpaiveadat
avrdv '/araXiovra, ayfiaivovzog yv, ozt, d '/ariXvev, oi'/ yv rnv
vdfiov. Td di '/at einelv '0 ovqavdg -/at fj yy naqeXei-
aovrat, liora sv y fiia '/sqaia oi fiy naqiXdy dnd rov
vdfiov. (Mat. xxiv. 35; v. 18.) Td nqd oiqavov /at yyg naq-
sqydfisva io'ijfiavsv fiy 'dvra rov 'ovrwg vdfiov.
Ihid. c. 52. (Christ's account of Himself ) 'Enst ovv oiqavov

CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 441
'/at yyg sn avvsardrcov naqyXdov dvaiai, ^aaiXsiai, al "iv ysv-
vyrolg yvvai'/dv" nqocpyrslat, '/at 'daa roiavra, c'og oi"/ 'dvra Qsoi
nqnardyfiara' svdev yovv Xiyst, "Hdaa cpvrsia, yv oi'/ icpi-
TEvasv b narfjq n oiqdviog, i'/qt^codyasrai." (Mat. xv.
13.) Aid roiro avrdg dXydfjg wv nqncpqryg sXsysv "'Eyd slfit
fj niXy rfjg ^wqg' 6 8i' ifioi slas qydfisvog slaiqysrat
sig T'^v Kcofjv," (John x. 9), wg oi'/ ovayg sriqag rfjg ad^stv
8vvaftivyg 8i8aa'/aXiag' 8id xat s^da Xiycov "Asvrs nqdg fis
ndvreg ol xonidvreg" (Mat. xi. 28), rnvriariv ol tijv a^jj-
deiav Cyroivreg, '/at fifj svqiaxovreg airr'fjv '/at ndXtV "Td
ifid nqd^ara d'/niei T^g ififjg cpwvyg," (John X. 27), xat
dXXore' "tyrelre, xat evqia'/srs" (Mat. vii. 7), cog fiy nqodfjXwg
'/sifiivqg r-qg dXydsiag.
Ibid. c. 53. (Prophecy and the Heavenly voice) 'AXXd xat
f^ oiqavwv fidqrvg cpwvy y'/nvady Xiyovaa' "Ovrog iariv fiov
0 vldg 6 ayanyrdg sig nv sidd'/yaa, rnvrov a'/ovsrs,"
(Mat. iii. 17 ; Luke ix. 35), '/at nqdg roiroig int nXslnv airovg
nsnXavyfiivnvg iXiy^ai diXwv "roig nqocpyrag, naq wv dfj fis-
fiady/ivai i§£§aiovv, inidvfinivrag dXydsiag '/at firj fisfiadyxd-
rag rsXsvT'yaavrag dnscprjvaro slTfcov "HnXXnt nqocpyrai xat
jiaaiXslg snsdijiyaav Idslv, a vfislg (iXinsrs, xat
dxovaai, a vfislg d'/ovsrs, '/at dffyv Xiyw vfilv, ovre
el8ov, o'ire rjxovaav," (Mat. xiii. 17; Luke x. 24), sn fiyv
EXsysv "Eyd slfit, nsqt ov Mwvafjg nqoscprjrsvaev, el
ndv, nqoipyryv iysqsl vfilv Kiqtog b Qsdg fjjidv, ix
rdv d8sXcpdv vficov, wansq '/at sfii, airov dxoisrs
'/ard ndvra. Og dv 8s fifj dxoiay rov nqocp'fjTOv s'/st-
vov, dnod-avslrat. (John v. 46; Deut. xviii. 15; Acts iii. 22.)
Ibid. c. 54. (The Sadducees) HXyv rdXydfj roi vdfiov sl8cdg,
2a88ov/aiotg nvvd-avofiivoig , xad' ov Xdyov Mwiafg snrd aw-
S'ywqyasv yafislv, scpy, "MwiJayg '/ard tijv axXyqo'/aq8Lav
Vfidv inirqsxpsv vfilv. 'An dqyyg ydq ovrwg ov/ iyi
vsro' 0 ydq '/riaag an' dqyyg rdv dvdqwnov, aqasv
xat dfjXv inoiyasv airdv." (Mat. xxii. 23; xix. 8, 4; Mark
X. 5, 6.)
Ibid. c. 55. (Oaths and Prayer) Tolg 8s vofii'Qovaiv , dg
al yqacpat 8i8da'/ovaiv, 'on 6 ©eog 0;iivm, sqiy ""Ea rw v ft cov
rd vat vat, to o'v ov rd ydq nsqiaaov roircov sx rov

442 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
novyqov iartv." (Mat. v. 37.) Kat rolg Xiyovaiv, on 'A^qadft
xat laadx xai'la'/d^ dnidavov, scpy " Oi'/ sartv Qsdg vs
'/qdv, dXXd Kdvrcov." (Mat. xxii. 32.) ToTg de oiofiivoig, on
b Qsdg netqdtei, dg al yqacpat Xiyovatv, s'cpy "'0 n ovy qdg
ianv b neiqd^wv,^ b '/at airdv neiqdaag.'^ Tolg 8i vno-
Xafi^dvovaiv OZI b Qedg ov nqoytvda'/st scpy "Ol8sv ydq 6
narfjq vfidv b oiqdviog 'on yqy'Csrs rovnov dndvrcov,
nqtv airdv d^idayre." (Mat. iv. 3; vi. 8, 32.) ToTg de ni-
arsvovaiv, tug al yqacpat Xiyovatv, 'on jifj ndvra ^Xinst, " Ev
Tip 'xqvnrcp svyeade" elndv, "Kat 6 naryq vfidv 6 ^Xi-
ncov rd '/qvnrd dnoddaet vfilv." (Mat. vi. 6.)
Ihid. c. 56. (The Heavenly Father) Tolg de olofiivotg airdv
fifj ayaddv eivat, dg al yqacpat Xiyovatv, scpy "Tiva vfidv
airyasi vldg dqrov, fi'fj Xidov intdwast avnp; 'y '/at
lydvv alrrjaEi, fiy ocptv ini8dasi ainp; sl ovv vfislg,
novyqot ovrsg, o"8are ddfiara dyadd dtSdvat rolg
rixvoig vfidv, 7zdaqi fidXXov b naryq vfidv 6 oiqdviog
dcoaei ayadd rolg alrov fiivotg avrdv, '/at rolg notov-
aiv rd diXyfia airov;" (Luke xi. 11; Mat. vii. 9.) ToTg di
airdv dia^s^aiovfiivotg iv vacp slvai, scpy "My dfidayrs rdv
oiqavdv, on d-qdvog Qsov iartv, fiyrs rqv yfjv, 'on
vjconddiov rdv noddv airov iariv." (Mjit. v. 35.) ToTg
de nqoXa§ovaiv on dvaicov dqiysrat 6 ©eog scpy "'0 Qsdg
s'Xsog dsXst xal oi d-vaiag, iniyvwatv airoi '/at oiy
dXoxavrdfiara." (Mat. ix. 13; xii. 7.)
Ihid. c. 57. {The Good God) Tolg 8i nsidofiivoig '/a/dv
avrdv eivat, dg al yqaipat Xiyovatv, e'cpy' "M-fj fie Xiyere dya-
d-dv. '0 ydq dyaddg elg iariv." (Mat. xix. 17.) "Fivsads
ayadot '/at olxriqfiovsg, dg b naryq, 6 ev ToTg oiqa
volg, og dvariXXst rdv yXiov in' ayadolg xat novy
qolg, '/at cpeqet rdv verdv ent di'/atotg xat c 8 i'/oig."
(Luke vi. 35; Mat. v. 45.) ToTg de ynaryfiivoig noXXovg dsovg
vnovoslv, tjg at yqaipat Xiyovatv, scpy ""Axovs 'laqafjX, Ki
qtog 6 ©eog Vfidv, Kvqtog etg iariv." (Mark xii. 29.)
Ihid. c. 61. (The unfaithful servant) El 8i Ttg twv naq-
effTWTWv, 8ioixelv dvvdfievog tjjv dyvwfioaivyv rdv dvdqdnwv,
' Source unknown.

CLEMENTINE HOMILIES. 443
vnoariXXerai, rfjg avroi dvanavascog q)qovTi'C,wv fidvqg /at airdg
nqoado'/dno d'xnvaai' 8ovXs novyqs xat d'/vqqi, e'8si as rd dq-
yvqidv finv 7cqn(iaXElv int twv rqans^irdv, xat iyw dv iXdiov
i'nqa^a rd ifidv ixfidXere rdv dyqelov dovXov elg rd a'/drog rd
i^dreqov. (Mat. xxv. 26 ; Luke xix. 22.)
Ihid. c. 63. (Zacchaeus) Tiva di dXXov alqfjaofiai rdv naq-
o'vTwv, ijZaxxo-Tov, nqdg ov '/alb Kiqtog fjfidv elaidv dvenai-
aaro, rov acot,eadat '/qivag d§iov sivat; (See Luke xix. 5, 8.)
Ihid. c. 71. 'A^tdg ianv b iqydrqg roi ftiadov airoi. (Luke
x..7.)_ 3 . ,
Ihid. VIII. 4. AXXd xat noXXot, cpyaiv, 'xXyrot, oXiyoi ds
i'/Xs'/roi. (Mat. xx. 16.)
Ibid. c. 7. Toirov ydq e'vexev o 'lyaoig fjfidv nqdg nva
nv/1'orsqov '/vqiov avrdv Xiyovra, fiydiv di noiovvra dv avrdg
nqoaira^ev, ecpy Ti fie Xiysig, '/vqts, 'xvqts, xat oi notslg
a Xiyw; (Luke vi. 46; Mat. vii. 21.)
Ihid. IX. 22. 'AXX' bfiwg xav ndvrsg daiftovsg fisrd ndvrwv
rdv naddv vjidg cpsiywaiv, oix sartv iv roirq) fidvctj yaiqstv,
aXX iv np dt svaqEarlav rd ovdfiara vfidv iv ovqavip wg aet
CdvTwv dvayqaipfjvai. (Compare Luke x. 20.)
Ihid. XI. 20. Airdg ydq b dtddaxaXog nqoayXwdslg rfvysro
rip narqt, rolg avrdv dvatqdiaiv dcpsdfjvat rd dfidqrqjia slndv
Hdrsq, dcpsg airolg rdg dfiaqriag airdv, oi ydq o'i-
8aaiv d notovatv. (Luke xxiii. 34.)
Ihid. XII. 29. '0 Tryg dXydsiag nqocpfjzyg scpy Td dyadd
sXdslv 8sl' fia'/dqiog 8i, cpyaiv, 8t' ov sqysrat' bfioiwg '/at rd
xaxd dvdy/y iXdslv, oiat 8i 8t' ov Eqysrai. (Mat. xviii. 7 ; Luke
xvii. 1.)
Ibid. XVI. 21. "Eaovrat ydq, cog 6 Kiqtog sinsv, xpevdand-
aroXoi, xpevdelg nqocpfjcai, alqiaeig cptXaqyiai.
Ihid. XVIL 5. Mfj cpo^ydyre and rov dno'/reivovrng
rd aiofia, rfj di xpvyfj fifj dvvafiivov Tt yroi^ffaf cpo^fj-
dyrs di rdv dvvd fievov '/at acofia '/at xpvyyv elg rfjv
yievvav roi nvqdg ^aXelv. Nal Xiyw vfilv, rovrov cpo-
fi'TjdyTe. "Ort di 'ovrwg roirov cpn^ydyvat eXeyev dg 8ixatov
Qedv, nqdg ov '/at ddt'/ovfiivovg ^odv Xiyet, naqa^oXfjv elg rovro
elndv indyst T'qv Eqfiyvsiav Xiywv sl ovv 6 x^tT^g T^g adt-
xi'ag inoiyasv oirwg, 8id rd s'/darors d^uod-fjvai, ndacj) jidXXov

444 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
0 naryq not-yaei t^v i'/dixyatv rdv ^odvrcov nqdg av
rdv fjfisqag '/at vv/rdg; y did rd fiaxqodvfislv airdv
in avroig do'/slrs 'drt oi nofrjast; Nal, Xiyco vfilv,
noiyast, xat iv rayei. (Luke xii. 4, 5; Mat. x. 28; Luke
xvui. 6-8.)
Ihid. XVIII. 15. Kat 6 2iftwv int rovnp dyavaxryaag scpy
rdv adv 8i3da'/aXov alrico slndvra' i^ofioXoyovfiai aot '/iqis
rov ovqavov xat ryg yfjg, 'on dnsq yv '/qvnrd aocpolg, dn-
e'/dXvxpag aird vynioig dyXd^ovaiv. . . . ivdiyerat ydq ai
roi) eivat rov dyfiiovqyov rd '/qvnrd a eXeyev rip '/at rdv 'Haatav
einelv Avni^co rd ardfta fiov iv naqa^oXalg, '/at i§-
eqev^oftat '/e'/qv ft fiiva, dnd '/ara^oXfjg '/oafiov. (Mat.
xi. 25; xiii. 35.)
Ihid. XIX. 2. (Temptation and Punishment) Kal dXXy nov
Olda avrdv elqy/ora' el b aaravdg rdv aaravdv i'/^aXXei, icp
savrdv ifisqiady, ndg ovv ary/y fj ^aaiXsia; Kat dXXodt s'cpy
'0 de rd '/a'/dv aniqfia ansiqag iartv 6 dtd^oXog, '/at
ndXtv My dors nqdcpaaiv rep novyqip' dXXd xat avii^ov-
Xsvwv stqy/sv "Ea rw v fidv rd val val, '/at r d ov o'v re
8i nsqiaaov rovnov ex roi novyqov ianv. 'AXXd '/at iv
fj 7iaqi8io'/s svyfj syofisv slqyfiivov. Pvaai yfidg and rov
novyqov. Kat dXXy nov slnslv vniaysro rolg das§ovatv. 'Yn
dysrs s'tg rd axdrog rd i^wrsqov o iroifiaas 6 naryq np dta^dXcii xat
ToTg dyyiXoig airoi. (Mat. v. 37; vi. 15; Eph. iv. 27; James v. 12.)
Ihid. c. 7. OiJTw ydq 6 dxpsvdfjg fjficov sine dtdda'/aXog' 'Ev,,
neqiaaev ftarog '/aq8iag ardfta XaXel. (Mat. xii. 34.)
Ihid. c. 20. iiCat 6 Hirqog' fiefivfjfieda rov Kvqiov vfidv '/at
didaa'/dXov dg ivreXXdfievog elnsv vfilv Td ftvaryqta ifiot /at
rolg vlolg tov o'i'/ov fiov cpvXd^ars.^
' Source unknown. — For the use made in the Clementine Homilies of
other Books of Scripture the following references may suffice :
Acts of the Apostles,
Jbid. III. 53, See above, p, 203, (Acts iii. 22; vii, 37,)
Galatians,
Jbid. XIX. 22, See before, p. 236, (Gal, iv, 10,)
Jbid. XVII. 19. See before, p, 236, note to Clera, Hom,
Ephesians,
Ibid. XIX. 2. See before, p, 241. (Eph, iv, 27.) ¦

TESTAMENT OF THE TWELVE PATEIAECHS. 445

19. Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs.^
Levi 4. Hoifjast Kvqtog xqiaiv snt roig vlovg rdv dvdqd
nwv on TCOV nsrqdv aytt,ofiivwv '/at roi fjXiov a^svvvfiivov xat
riov iddrcov ^yqaivofiivcov, xat roi nvqdg xaranryaaovrog , '/at
7caayg xriascog xXovovfiivqg xat doqdnov nvsvfidrwv ry/o fiivwv
rov ccdov a'/vXsvofiivov int np nddst rov vxpiarov, ol dvdqwnoi
dniarovvrsg snifisvovaiv iv ralg ddt'/iaig. (Mat. xxvii. 45.)
Levi 10. 'Adcpidg slfit dnd ndayg das^eiag vfidv xat naqa-
j3affewg jjv notyasrs int avvrsXsicjc rdv aldvwv sig rdv acorfjqa
rov xdafiov, das^oivrsg, nXaviovrsg rdv 'laqafjX, '/at ineyeiqovrsg
airip xcr/d fisydXa naqd Kvqiov. (Heb. ix. 26.)
Levi 14  TWV dqyisqiwv, oinvsg ini^aXoiat rdg yslqag
airdv ijzt rdv awryqa rov xdofiov. (Mat. xxvii. 1.)
Levi 18. jKat ;iieTa to ysviadat rfjv ivdixyatv airdv naqd
Kvqiov, TJJ Isqarsi^ rdrs iysqsl Kiqiog Isqia '/atvdv, ip ndvreg
ol Xdyot Kvqiov dno'/aXvcpd-rjaovzai .... Kat dvareXel darqov
avrov iv oiqavip dg ^aaiXeig, ipcori^wv cpwg yvdaewg iv yXicji
yfiiqag .... Ol ovqavot dvotyyaovrat '/at sx roi vaoi T^g 8d-
^rjg y^EL in avrdv dyiaafia fisrd cpwvyg narqt'/fjg dg dnd
• Tertullian (Adv. Marc, V, 1, Scorp, c, 13) has references to a portion of
this book. Test. Benj. c. 11, Origen also (Hom. in Joshuara XV, c, 6) refers to
it by name with a certain raeasure of respect, although declaring that it is not
in the Canon, It professes to be the legacy of good counsels left by each of
the Sons of Jacob to his children. It is the work of a Jewish Christian favour
able to St Paul , who dwells upon the Patriarchal rather than the Mosaic period
of Jewish History. It has been supposed by some (following Grabe) that the
work was written by a Jew before the Christian era, and afterwards interpolated
so as to contain Pauline Christian theology. In favour of this view it may be
urged that the writing is not always consistent with itself, but we must urge
on the other hand that, even allowing due weight to this, it seems rather to
show a Jewish author proud of his ancestry and yet devoted to his Christian
faith than to require us to regard all the Christian passages as interpolations in
a Jewish original. See Sinker's " Testamenta XII Patriarcharum " for copious
discussions. Some (Anger) make tbe date soon after the middle of the second
century; but there is much reason to put it earlier, even at the beginning of
the century , inasmuch as the author seems to write before Judaism was so ho
pelessly overthrown as it was before the middle of the second century. The
principal references to the N, T., in addition to those in our text , seem to be
Jud. 20, TO TtvEufjia ttj; a'XvjiEia; (John xv, 26); Levi 3, o'ap,iiiv euu6(a; XoyixKi'v
(Eom, xii, 1); Dan 5, tov ©eov T'ij; EfpilVY); (Jobn xv, 33); Zab. 9, ©eov i-^ ox"!;
fian a'vSpuTcou; Benj, 10, tov paotXE'a Toov oupavuv, tov ^Ttl yij; tpavE'vTa (xopipT)
avSpuTiou TaTCEtvu'uEu; (Phil, ii, 6-8) ; Benj. 3, iv al't^aTL 8ta3iiixir); (Heb, xiii, 20) ;
Is. 7, aVapTtov Ei; SoivaTov (1 John v, 16); Levi 18, 5uaEi toi; ayioi; (payEiv ix
TOU ^uXou Tij; ?uiq; (Eev. ii, 7); Dan 5, t-^; VE'a; 'lepouaaXiQn (Eev. xxi. 2).

446 TESTIMONIES OF HEEETICS.
'A§qadfi narqdg 'laad'/. Kal 8d^a vx^i'iarov in' airdv qydyaszai
'/at nvsvfia avviaswg '/at dytaafiov '/azanaiast in avrdv iv rip
'vdart. (Mat. ii. 2.)
Judah 24. Kat dvotyyaovrat in' airdv ol ovqavot ixyiai
nvsifiarog siXnyiav narqdg dyinv. (Ibid.)
Dan 6. '0 naryq (al. acoryq) rdv idvdv san ydq dXydyg
'/at fia'/qddvfiog nqdng '/at ransivdg, '/at i'/8t8da'/cov 8id rdv
s'qywv vdfiov Qeoi. (Mat. xi. 30.)
Asher 7. "Ewg ov b vxpiarog iniO'/ixpyrai tijv yfjv, '/at airdg
sXdwv dg avdqconog, fisrd dvd-qwnwv iadiwv '/at nivcov. (Mat.
xi. 19.)
Benjamin 6. HXyqwdyasrat sv aot nqocprjrsia oiqavov nsqt
roi ajivov rov Qsov, xal awzfjqog roi xdafiov, on naqadodr-
asrat, '/at dvafidqryrog vniq das^cov dnodavslrai, iv a'ifiart
Siad'y/yg. (Mat. xxvi. 27 ; John i. 29.)
Benjamin 11. Kat dvaaryasrat ex rov aniqfiardg fiov iv
variqoig xaiqoig dyanrjzdg Kvqiov, dxavwv snt yfjg cpwvfjv cnrzov,
yvcoaiv '/aivfjv cpwril^wv ndvra rd s'dvq cpcog yvdaswg insfi^aivcov
rip 'laqafjX iv awryqia, xat dqnd^wv dg Xi'/og dn' airov, vmI
didoig rfj away coy JJ rdiv idvdv. Kat ewg avvrsXsiag rdv aldvcov
sarat iv avvaywyalg idvdv '/at ev ToTg dqyovatv airiov, cog fiov-
ai'/dv fiiXog sv ardfiart ndvrwv. Kat iv ^i^Xoig dyiatg sarai
dvayqacpdfiEvog, '/at rd sqyov '/at b Xdyog airov' xai sarat ex-
Xs'/rdg Qsoxj ewg toi; aldvog' '/at dt' avrdv awinai fis 'la'/d^
6 naryq fiov, Xiycov ' Airdg avanXyqdast rd varsqfjfiara rfjg cpv-
Xrjg aov. (St Paul's Epp. passim.)

LISTS OF HEEETICS.

447

The follo,wing lists of Heretics from the chief authorities may
be interesting. It is from Lipsius, "Zur Quellen-Kritik," with
some alterations.

Irenaeus.

Hippolytus.'

Epiphanius.

Philastrius.

Fseudo-
TertuUian.'''

Theodoret.

Naassenes

Valenti
Peratae
nus and
Sethians
his School.
Justin (later
in Sumraary).
Simon
SimonValentinus Secundus
Ptolemaeus MarcusHeracleon
Simon
Simon
Simon
Simon
Menander
Basilides
Menander
Menander
Menander
Menander
Saturninus
Saturnilus
Saturninus
Saturninus
Saturninus
Saturninus
Basilides
Menander
Basilides
Basilides
Basilides
Basilides
Nicolaitans
Nicolaitans
Nicolaitans
Marcion
OphitesCainites
Carpocra
(Prepon)Carpocrates
Carpocras
Carpocras
SethiansCarpocrates
Carpocrates
tes
Cerinthus
Cerinthus
Cerinthus
Cerinthus
Cerinthus
Ebionites
Ebionites Theodotus (Byz.)
The other
Theodotus and Melchi
zedekians
(Nazarenes)
Ebionites
Ebionites
Ebionites
i
» Hippolytus does not observe quite the same order in his Summary. Cor
don, Apelles, Mouoimus, Tatian are earlier in the summary: Carpocrates and
Hermogenes are later,
2 Epiphanius, Philastrius and Pseudo-Tertullian seem to draw frora the sarae
source, Hippolytus is in tbe main based on Irenaeus whose very words he often
reproduces. See Lipsius's " Quellen d. altesten Ketzergeschichte. "
448

TESTIMONIES OF HERETICS.

Fseudo-
Ireuaena.
Hippolytus.
Epiphanius.
Philastrius.
Tertnllian.
Theodoret.
Nicolai
Nicolaitans
tans
Valentinians
Valentinians
Valentinians
Valentinians
SecundusPtoleraaeus
Ptoleraaeus
Ptoleraaeus Secundus
Secundus
Secundus
and others
Marcosians
Heracleon
Heracleon
Marcus
Colarbasus
Heracleon
Marcus
Marcus
Colarbasus
Colarbasus
Colarbasus
Sethians or
Ophites
Ophites
Cainites
Cainites
Sethians
Peratae, Mo
Archontites
uoimus
Bardesanes
Cerdon
Cerdon
Cerdon
Cerdon
Cerdon
Cerdon
Marcion
Marcion
Marcion
Marcion
Marcion
Marcion
Lucian
Lucian
Lucan
Lucan
Apelles
Apelles
Apelles
Apelles
Apelles
Docetae
Manes
Monoiraus
Eneratites
Tatian
Tatian
Tatian
Tatian
Tatian
Hermogenes
Secundum
Cataphry
Secundum
Phrygas
gians
Phrygas
Simonians
Quartodeci
Quartodeci
Barbelio-
mans
mans
tes, &c.
Cataphrygians
Alogi, &c.
Cainites
Eneratites
Noetos
Theodotus
Theodotus
Theodotus
Theodotus
(Byz.)
(Byz.)
(Byz.)
(Byz.)
Elkesaites
Melchizede
Melchizede
The other
Melchize
kians
kians
Theodotus
dekians
Noetians
Noetians
and Melchi
zedekians
Elkesaites, &c.
NicolaitansMontanistsNoetians Quartodeci raans,
PART IV.
EXTRA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.

29

451

PART IY.
EXTRA-CANONICAL GOSPELS/

I GOSPEL OF THE HEBREWS.
(Sec also Sections II. VI.)
A. TESTIMONIES TO THE EXISTENCE OF THE
GOSPEL OF THE HEBBEWS.
1. Ignatius.
Ignatius ad Smyrn. c. 3. See before, p. Ill, Note 3.
Jerome, de Vir. III. c. 16. Scripsit (sc. Ignatius) et ad Smyrnaeos
(-proprie ad Polycarpum) ... in qua et de Evangelio quod nuper
a me translatum est, super persona Christi ponit testimonium.
(See whole passage below.) 2. Hegesippus. '^
Eus. H. E. IL 23; IIL 20. See before, p. 127. (Hegesippus
had some other authority than G. H)
Ihid. IV. 22. See before, p. 128 and Note 6. (Hegesippus
quoted frrnn G. H. and from (or, which is in?) Syriac)
' This title seeras more fitly to describe them than "Heretical Gospels"
(which the Nazarene form of the Gospel of the Hebrews cannot be said to be)
or " Apocryphal Gospels " (which the Gospel of the Hebrews in any forra scarcely
was). The "Gospel of James" or the "Gospel of Nicodemus" may be called
Apocryphal. * Hegesippus. On Hegesippus see Introduction, and before, p, 128, note 7.
See there also a quotation from Photius showing that a quotation by him agrees
with our St Mat, xiii. 16. He is the first of whom we read that he used the
G. H., but it does not appear that he used it in preference to the Canonical
Gospels, 29*

452 extea-canonical gospels.
3. Papias.
Eus. H. E. IIL 39. See before, p. 57 and Note 7. (Papias'
work and G. H. had a narrative about a sinful woman.y
4. Ibenaeus.
B. L. 26. 2. See before, p. 431. (The Ebionites used only
Matthew's Gospel)^
B. LII. 11. 7. See before, p. 67. {Same effect as foregoing)
5. Clement of Alexanbria.
Strom. II. 9. p. 453. Tairyg de dqyfj rd davfidaai rd nqdy
fiara, dg HXdrwv sv Qsatr-qryr Xiyst, xat Mardiag iv ralg na-
qaddasat naqatvdv ' Qavfiaaov rd naqdvra, ' ^adfidv rovrov nqd
rov rfjg snsxeiva yvwaswg vnoridifisvog ' fj '/dv rep '/ad' 'Epqaiovg
EiayyeXicj), '0 davfidaag ^aatXsvasi,' yiyqanrai, 'Kat b ^aai-
Xeiaag dvanaiaerat.''
Ihid. V. 10. p. 684. Ov ydq cpd-oviov, cpyat, naqyyyeiXev b
Kiqtog s'v nvi EiayysXii^, "Mvar'qqiov ifidv ifiot xat rolg vlolg
TOV o'ixov fiov. " ^ 6. Origen.
Comment, in Joann. t. 2. Tom. IV. p. 63. (Migne, Vol. IV.
p. 132.) Kat rd Hvsvfia did rov Adyov iyivsro . . . sl xat Xi
ysig Tivsg neqiandv fjfidg elg rd ivavriov 8o'/ovatv. 'Edv 8i nqoa-
ierai Ttg to '/ad' 'Epqaiovg EiayyiXiov, evda airdg b 2wrqq cprj
aiv "Aqri eXa§s fie fj ftyryq fiov rd"Ayiov Hvevfia, iv
fii^ rdv rqtydv fiov, xat dniveyxi fie elg rd dqog rd
fiiya Qa^wq' snanoqyast ndg fifjryq Xqtarov rd did rnv Ad-
' Papias. Eusebius does not say that Papias quoted the Gospel of the He
brews; but he says that the narrative of the woman accused of many sins which
Papias recorded was in that Gospel. As said in p. 57 (note 7), it is Eusebius,
not Papias, who refers to that Gospel,
• Irenaeus. Irenaeus says in general terras that the Ebionites are convicted
of wrong views of God, even from that Gospel according to Matthew which alone
they use; and again, that they use only Matthew's Gospel, and reject Paul as an
apostate from the Law,
1 Clem. Alex. So in Clem. Hom, XIX. 20: MenMTj'neSa tou Kupiou iffiuM
xaX StSaaxaXou u'? ^vreXXoVevo? eItcev tqixEv' ta (AUUTiipta iiioX xaX tof? uloi? tou
oVxou fjiou (puXa^aTE. Clem. Alex, is referring to Barnabas in the beginning of
the chapter.

GOSPEL r>F THE HEBEEWS. 453
yov ysysvvyfiivov Hvsvfia "Ayiov sivat 8ivarai. Taira Si '/at
rovro oi yaXsndv eqfiyvsvaai. El ydq 6 nnidv rd diXyfia rov
Harqdg roi iv rolg ovqavolg adsXcpdg xat ddsXcpfj -/at fiyryq
iartv avrnv, '/at cpddvsi rd 'adsXcpdg Xqiarov'' 'dvofia oi fidvnv
inl TO rdv avdqdncov yivog, dXXd '/at int rd roirov dstdrsqa'
nvdsv dronov sarat fidXXov ndaqg yqyfian^ovayg fiyrqdg Xqiarov
did rd 7ioislv rd diXqfia rov iv rolg oiqavolg Harqdg, rd Hvsvfia
rd 'Ayiov sivat fiyriqa.
Homil. in Jerem. 15. (Migne, Vol. III. p. 433.) El 8i Tig Tra-
qadi'ysrat rddqri sXa^i fis fj ftyryq fiov rd'Ayiov Hvsvfia
•/at avfjvey/E fis elg rd 'dqog rd fiiya rd Ta^ioq, '/at rd
E^fjg.^
7. Eusebius.
Eus. H. E. III. 25. See before, p. 11. (Hebrew Christians
use the G. H)
Ihid. III. 27. See before, p. 432. (Ebionites use G. H alone)
Eus. Theoph. IV. 12. The cause therefore of the divisions of
soul that came to pass in houses Himself taught, as we have
found in a place in the Gospel existing among the Jews in the
Hebrew language, in which it is said, &c.*
Ibid. Td sig fjfidg y'/ov 'E^qaixolg yaqaxryqaiv EiayyiXiov.^
(Migne, Vol. IV. p. 155.) 8. Jerome.
Comment, ad Eph. V. 4. (Vallars. Vol.. VII. p. 641.) In Hebraico
quoque Evangelio legimus Dominum ad discipulos loquentem: "Et
nunquam," inquit, "laeti sitis, nisi cum fratrem vestrum videritis
in caritate." Comment, in Mich. (a.d. 392) B. IL c. VIL (Vallars. Vol. VI.
p. 520.) Qui legerit Canticum Canticorum, et sponsum animae,
1 Origen, This passage perhaps refers to the Temptation, See Mat, iv, and
Mark'i. 12. See below for Jerome's quotation (Jerome, Coraraent, in Mich, VII, 6),
Origen omits "by one of my hairs" in his second quotation,
' Eusebius, Prof Lee's transl. of Syriac Version of Theophania, Nichol
son, p, 6.
2 Gospel of the Hebrews, Hilg, says tbis reference was first noticed by
Fritsche, Nicholson, p, 6.

454 EXTEA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.
Dei sermonem intellexerit, credideritque Evangelio, quod secun
dum Hebraeos editum nuper transtulimus (in quo ex persona
Salvatoris dicitur: Modo tulit me mater mea, Sanctus Spiritus,
in uno capillorum meorum), non dubitabit dicere Sermonem Doi
ortuni esse de Spiritu, et animam, quae sponsa Sermonis est,
habere socrum Sanctum Spiritum , qui apud Hebraeos genere
dicitur feminine "RUA." ... Et ne forte dubites Verbum et
Filium nasci de Spiritu Sancto, Gabrielis ad Mariam verba con-
sidera: Spiritus Sanctus veniet super te, etc.^
De Vir. LU. c. 2. (a.d. 392.) Evangelium quoque, quod appella-
tum secundum Hebraeos et a me nuper in Graecum Latinumque
sermonem translatum est, quo et Origenes saepe utitur. ^
Ihid. c. 3. See before, p. 139 and Note 1. (The Hebrew
original of Matthew in Cesarea. The Nazarenes in Beroea
use it)
Comment, in Isai. B. XI. c. xl. 11. (a.d. 410). (Vallars.
Vol. IV. p. 485.) Sed et in Evangelio quod juxta Hebraeos scrip
tum Nasaraei lectitant, Dominus loquitur: Modo tulit me mater
mea, Spiritus Sanctus. Nemo autem in hac parte scandalizari
debet, quod dicatur apud Hebraeos spiritus genere feminino,
quum nostra hngua appelletur genere masculine, et Graeco ser
mone, neutro. In divinitate enim nullus est sexus.
Comment, in Mat. II. 6. (Vallars. Vol. VII. p. 14.) Bethlehem
Judaeae: librariorum hic error est. Putamus enim ab Evangelista
primo editum , sicut in ipso Hebraico legimus Judae , non Ju
daeae. . . .

' Jerome. The Elkesaites represented the Holy Spirit as a female principle,
(Hippol. Eef, Haer, IX, 13, p, 462, and Epiph, Haer, 19, 4; 53, 1.) It appears as iu
the Clem, Hom, (III. 20-27) that Christ was regarded as the male principle and the
Holy Spirit as the female principle. The Spirit "brooded over the deep, " &c. The
'Helena' of Siraon, the 'Sophia' of Valentinus, and the 'Philoumena' of Apelles,
are names given by Gnostics to a feraale principle, by no means corresponding,
however, to the Holy Spirit as represented in Scripture. The worship of tiie
Virgin Mary in the middle ages may show the result of the same tendency. See
Baring Gould's 'Lost and Hostile Gospels,' p. 132.
^ The quotations of Origen from the G. H, by name are only the two
given above. The early portion of his Homilies on Matthew is lost. The
Latin translation of what remains begins in c. XIII. But Jerome is not likely
to be mistaken in this statement that Origen often used the G. H. His know
ledge of tbe text of that Gospel would enable Jerome to identify some quotations
in Origen of which the source is not stated. See list of those quotations in
Nicholson, G. H, p, 143,

GOSPEL OF THE HEBEEWS. 455
Ibid. VI. 11. In Evangelio quod appeUatur secundum He
braeos. . . .
Ihid. XII. 13. In Evangelio, quo utuntur Nasareni et Ebio-
nitae, quod nuper in Graecum de Hebraeo sermone transtulimus
et quod vocatur a plerisque Matthaei authenticum. . . .
Ibid. XXIII. 35. In Evangelio, quo utuntur Nasareni, pro
filio Barachiac, . . . (Mat. xxiii. 35.)
Ihid. XXVII. 16. Iste (Barrabas) in Evangelio, quod scri
bitur juxta Hebraeos, . . .
Ibid. c. 51. In Evangelio cujus saepe fecimus mentionem, su-
perliminare ...
Comment, in Isai. XI. 2. (Vallars. Vol. IV. p. 156.) Juxta
Evangelium, quod Hebraeo sermone conscriptum legunt Nasaraei,
"descendit super eum omnis fons (1315) Spiritus Sancti." . . .
Comment, in Ezech. XVIIL 7. (a.d. 413). (Vallars. Vol. V.
p. 207.) Et in Evangeho quod juxta Hebraeos Nazaraei legere
consueverunt, . . .
Adv. Pelag. IIL 2. (a.d. 416). (Vahars. Vol. II. p. 768.) In
Evangelio juxta Hebraeos quod Chaldaico quidem Syroque ser
mone sed Hebraicis Uteris^ scriptum est, quo utuntur usque hodie
Nazareni secundum Apostolos, sive ut plerique autumant juxta
Matthaeum . . .
Epist. ad Hedih. (after a.d. 398). (Vallars. Vol. I. p. 825,)
In Evangeho, quod Hebraicis literis scriptum est, legimus, . . .
9. Theodoret (a.d. 451-458).
Haer. Fab. II. 1. (Ebionites). Mdvov di rd '/ard 'E^tcovaiovg
EiayyiXiov 8iyovrai.
Ibid. (Ebionites.) EiayysXiqi de rip xard Mardalov /iy-
qqvrat fidvct). 10. Nicephorus (a.d. 758-828).
See before, p. 29.

" See before, pp. 139, 140, where he says it was written Hebraicis literis
verbisque.

456 EXTEA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.

11. Epiphanius.
Epiph. Haer. I. t. 2. h. 29. p. 124. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 405.)
"E'yovai di (sc. ol Na^aqaioi) rd '/ard Mardalnv EiayyiXiov nXqq-
iararov 'E^qaiari. Haq' airolg ydq aacpwg rovro, '/addg i^
dqyyg iyqdcprj, 'E^qaixolg yqdfifiaaiv srt aiotsrat. Ovx oida 8i
sl xat rdg ysvsaXoyiag rdg dnd rov A^qadfi dyqi Xgiarov ns-
qielXov. Lbid. I. t. 2. h. 30. p. 126. See before, p. 139. (Ebionites
receive Matthew's Gospel, and call it 'according to the Hebrew's.')
Ihid. p. 130. (Migne, Vol. L p. 416.) '0 'Idaynog^ XeXijdd-
TWg ToXfiyaag yvot^e, '/at svqsv oidiv yqqfianov, nXfjv ^ifiXovg
rdg vniq yqrjftara' dvayivdaxwv ds iv rairaig dg ydq scpqv to
xaTa 'Icodvvqv EiayyiXiov dnd 'EXXddog sig 'E^qatda cpwvfjv fis-
raXycpdiv rpjqaro, xat rdg rdv 'AnoardXwv Hqd^etg. Ov fiyv
dXXd xat rd xard Mardalov 'E^qai'/dv cpiaet 'dv ix rovnov avay-
vovg ndXiv t^v dtdvoiav irqiyero.
Ihid. h. 46. p. 391. (Speaking of Tatian) Aiyerat 8i rd did
reaadqwv EiayyiXiov vn' avrov yeyevyadat, onsq xard 'Epqaiovg
rtvsg '/aXoiai.^

B. QUOTATIONS FBOM THE GOSPEL OF THE
HEBBEWS IN ITS NAZABENE OB ITS EBIONITE
FOBM.^
Epiph. Haer. L t. 2. h. 30. p. 137. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 426.)
'Ev rep yoiv naq' avroig EiayysXii^ xard Mardalov ovofia^ofiivcj)
' Epiphanius. Josephus, a Jewish Christian of the tirae of Constantine.
^ Epiphanius must be mistaken here. Hegesippus could scarcely have quoted
from the Gospel of the Hebrews if it had been Tatian's.
1 In collecting and arranging the following passages use has been made of
Fabricius's Codex Apocryphus ; Kleuker, Ausfiihrliche Untersuchung der Griiude
fiir die Aechtheit und Glaubwiirdigkeit der schriftlichen Urkunden des Christen
thums (1793); Hilgenfeld's 'Novum Testamentum extra Canonem receptum;'
Baring Gould's 'Lost and Hostile Gospels ; ' and especially of the latest and com-
pletest work on the subject, Nicholson's 'Gospel of the Hebrews.' There are
many other books with discussions of the perplexing subject which may be con
sulted with profit : Supernatural Eeligion , Dr Eoberts's Discussions on the Gos
pels, and his raore recent work 'The Gospels,' heing those which I have found
most suggestive. See also Lardner's works, and the notes on Cleraent of Eome,
2nd Epistle, in Lightfoot's and Gebhardt & Harnack's editions.

GOSPEL OF THE HEBEEWS. 457
ovy oX<i) de nXyqEardnp dXXd VEvodsvfiivcjr, '/at -fj/qcorqqiaafiivcj)
(^EPqai'/dv di rovro '/aXovaiv), SficpiqsraL, 'on iyivsro ng avyq
nvnfian lyadvg, xat aiTOg c5g Itwv rqid'/ovra (Luke iii. 23), og
l.^sXi^arn fjfidg. Kat iXddv s'tg Kacpaqvanifi siafjXdsv s'tg rfjv
ol'/iav 2ifiwvog rov ini'/Xqdivrog Hirqov, '/at dvoi^ag rd ardfia
avrov sins' 7caqsqyn fisvog naqd rfjv Xifivyv Ti^sqiddog (Mat. iv.
18) i^eXe^dfiyv 'Iwdvvyv '/at 'idxwfiov, vlnig Zefiedaiov, xat 2i-
fiiova, '/at Avdqiav '/al Qa88alov '/at 2tfiwva rdv ZyXwrfp>, '/at
'lovdav rdv 'laxaqidryv, '/ai as rdv Mardalov'^ '/a dsCd fisvov int
rov rsXcoviov (Mat. ix. 9) i'/dXsaa, '/at y/oXoidyadg fioi. 'Yfidg
ovv ^oiXofiai Eivat 8s'/a8vo dnnardXnvg s'tg fiaqriqinv rov 'laqafjX.
Kat iyivsro 'Icodvvqg (ia7critcov, '/at i^fjXdov nqdg airdv Oaqi-
aalot, '/at i^anriadyaav, '/at ndaa 'IsqoadXvfia. Kat siysv b
'icodvvyg s'vdvfia dnd rqiydv '/afiyXov '/at tdvrjv dsqfiarivyv nsqt
rdv nacpiv avrov. Kat rd §qdfia airov, cpyat, fiiXt dyqtov, ov
fj ysvaig rjv rov jidvva, cog sy/qtg iv iXaicij, (Mat. iii. 4-7) 'iva
dydsv fisraarqixpcoat ryg dXydsiag rdv Xdyov etg xpsvdog, xat
dvrt d'/qidcov notyawatv sy'/qi8ag iv fiiXirt. 'H 8e dq'yfj roi naq
airolg EiayysXiov syst 'on iyivero iv ralg fjfiiqaig 'IIqcd8ov rov
(iaatXiwg rfjg 'lov8aiag, yXdev 'Iwdvvqg ^anri^cov ^dnnafia fie-
ravoiag iv np 'loq8dvy noraftcp , og sXiysro stvat ix yivovg Aa-
qdv roi Isqiwg , nalg Zayaqiov '/at 'EXiad^sr, '/at i^fjXdovro nqdg
avrdv navrsg.
Ihid. Kat^ fisrd rd slnslv nnXXd sntcpiqEi 'drt rov Xaov
§anTiadivrog yXde xat 'lyaovg, '/at i^anriadrj vnd rov Iwavvov.
Kat wg dvfjXdev dnd rov vdarog, yvoiyyaav ol ovqavot, '/at
slds rd nvsvfia rd dytov iv s'idst nsqiarsqdg '/arsXd-ovayg
'/at slasXdoiayg sig airdv. Kat cpwvfj iyivsro ex rod ovqa
vov Xiyovaa "ai fiov si 6 t^tog 6 ayanyrdg, iv aot yidd'/yaa."
Kat ndXtv "iyid afjfisqov ysyivvyxd as." Kat sidvg nsqiiXafixps
rdv rdnov cpdg fiiya.'^ "Ov tdwv, q)qatv, b 'Iwdvvyg Xiyst aircp
"ai rig sl, Kiqts;" Kat ndXiv cpcovfj e^ oiqavov nqdg aizdv
2 Epiphanius names only eight disciples, though he speaks of twelve. This
is characteristic of his carelessness.
3 This is a continuation in Epiphanius of what went before in Extract 1.
* See before, p. 126, note 5, on Justin's reference to the fire and the descent
of tho Spirit. Justin's correspondence with this form is not verbal. In Jerome's
version below the supernatural appearances are referred, as here, to our Lord's
coming up from tbe water. It will be observed that there is no little divergence
between Epiphanius and Jerome,

458 EXTEA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.
"oiTo'g effTtv 0 vtdg fiov b dyanyrdg, icp' ov yvddxyaa." Kat
TOTE, cpyatv, 'icodvvyg nqoansacov aircp sXsys "diojiaiaov, Kiqts'
av fis §dnriaov." '0 8i i'/wXvsv airip (i'/wXvasv aizdv Dind.),
Xiycov "dcpsg, on oijrcog iart nqinov nXyqwdyvai ndvza." (Mat.
iii. 14-17 and Heb. i. 5; v. 5.)
Ihid. p. 138. Haqa'/dxpavTEg ydq rdg naqd rip Mardaioj ys
vsaXoyiag dqyovrat rfjv dqyyv notsladai, dg nqosinofisv, Xiyovrsg
'on "iyivsro," cpyatv, "sv ralg fjfiiqatg 'Hqw8ov ^aaiXiwg rqg
'lov8alag int'Aqyisqiwg Kaidcpa,^ yXdi ng' Icodvvqg dvdfian ^anr-
l^cov (idnriafia fisravoiag iv np 'loqddvy norapiip, " '/at rd s^fjg.
Jerome, Comment, in Isai. B. IV. c. xi. 2. (Vallars. Vol. IV.
p. 155.) Illud quod in Evangelio Matthaei omnes quaerunt Ec
clesiastici, et non inveniunt ubi scriptum sit, Quoniam Nasa-
raeus vocabitur, eruditi Hebraeorum de hoc loco assumptum pu
tant. . . . Super hunc igitur florem, qui de trunco et de radice
Jesse per Mariam virginem repente consurget, requiescet Spiritus
Domini, quia in ipso complacuit omnem plenitudinem divinitatis
habitare corporahter: nequaquam per partes, ut in caeteris Sanc
tis, sed juxta Evangelium eorum, quod Hebraeo sermone con
scriptum legunt Nazarei: Descendit super eum omnis fons Spi
ritus Sancti. . . . Porro in Evangelio, cujus supra fecimus men
tionem, haec scripta reperimus: Factum est autem quum ascen-
disset Dominus de aqua, descendit fons omnis Spiritus Sancti, et
requievit super eum, et dixit illi: Fili mi, in omnibus Prophetis
exspectaham te, ut venires, et requiescerem in te. Tu es enim
requies mea, tu es filius meus primogenitus, qui regnas in sempi-
ternum.^ Id. Comment, in Esech. B. VI. c. xviii. (Vallars. Vol. V.
p. 207.) Et in Evangelio quod juxta Hebraeos Nazaraei legere
consueverunt, inter maxima ponitur crimina, qui fratris' sui spi
ritum contristaverit. (Mat. v. 24 ; compare xviii. 6, 7.)
Id. Comment, in Eph. B. III. c. v. 4. (Vallars. Vol. VII.
^ Epiphanius here gives another copy of the opening words not verbally
identical with what he gave on the previous page.
^ The want of verbal correspondence between Epiphanius and Jerome in
their transcripts of the Gospel, is one of the raany perplexities the student
must meet.
' Matthew frequently uses ' brother ' in this sense, Luke seldom, Mark never.
See next extract,

GOSPEL OF THE HEBREWS. 459
p. 641.) Verum et haec a Sanctis viris penitus propellenda, qui
bus magis convenit flere atque lugere, ut in Hebraico quoque
Evangeho legimus, Dominum ad discipulos loquentem: Et nun
quam, inquit, laeti sitis, nisi quum fratrem vestrum videritis in
caritate. (Compare Mat. as in last extract.)
Id. Comment, in Mat. B. I. c. vi. 11. (Vallars. Vol. VII.
p. 34.) In Evangelio quod appellatur secundum Hebraeos, pro su-
persuhstaniiali pane, reperi Mahar, quod dicitur crastinum, ut sit
sensus: panem nostrum crasticum, id est, futurum da nobis hodie.
LUd. B. IL c. xii. 13. (Vallars. Vol. VH. p. 77.) In Evan
gelio, quo utuntur Nazaraei et Ebionitae, (quod nuper in Grae
cum de Hebraeo sermone transtulimus et quod vocatur a pleris
que Matthaei authenticum) homo iste, qui aridam habet manum
caementarius scribitur; istius modi vocibus auxilium precans:
Caementarius eram manibus victum quaeritans; precor te, Jesu,
ut mihi restituas sanitatem, ne turpiter mendicem cibos. (Mat.
xii. 10, &c.)
Irenaeus, B. I. 25. 4. (According to Irenaeus, Carpocrates
used the following of which (" Quum es cum adversaria tuo, Sc. ")
we find apparently the Greek in Epiphanius I. t. 2. h. 27. p. 106.
"Onsq 6 'lyaovg iv np siayysXiCjj sins 8id Tijg naqa§oXyg 'on 'iadt
Evvodv Tip dvri8i'/ci) aov iv cp sl iv rep b8cp fisr airov, fiy 7cwg
b avTt'diXOg naqa8cp as np '/qirfj, '/at 6 '/qirfjg rip vnyqiry, '/at
6 vnyqiryg ^dXrj as s'tg rfjv cpvXa'/yv. 'Afifjv Xiyw aot, ov fifj
i^iXdyg s'/sldsv, ewg av ayrod^g tov sayarov '/odqdvryv. (Com
pare Luke xii. 58, 59.)
Epiph. Haer. L t. 2. h. 30. ^j. 151. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 449.)
Kat 8fjza an airoi roi Xqiarov rfjv aiaraaiv rairyg ^oiXovrai
cpsqsiv, dg xat ol nsqt Krjqivdov. Oaai ydq '/at ovrot '/ard rdv
i'/sivcov Xyqddy Xdynv dq'/srdv rip fiadyrjj sivat wg o di-
ddaxaXog. HsqiSTfiydy, cpaatv, b Xqiardg, /at av neqirfiy-
drjTi. (Mat. X. 25.)
Eus. Theophania. (Lee's Edition IV. 13. p. 234.) "I will
choose me the good, those good whom my Father in the heavens
(pater meus coelestis Hilgenf.) hath given me."^
Clem. Strom. See before, p. 9.
8 See Hilg, p. 16, and Nicholson, p. 45. "Father in heaven," an expres..
sion alraost confined to Matthew's Gospel.

460 EXTEA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.
Epiph. Haer. L t. 2. h. 30. p. 138. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 429.)
'Ensi8fj ydq §oiXovrat rdv fiiv 'lyaovv 'dvrwg sivat avdqconov. Iig
nqoslnov, Xqiardv di iv airip ysysvvfjad-ai rdv iv s'l'dst nsqiarsqdg
'/arafis^y/crza, '/addnsq ''Tj8y xat naq' dXXaig a'iqsaiv svqia'/Ofisv
awacpdivra aircp, '/at sivat airdv rdv Xqtardv ir/ aniqfiarog
dvdqdg xat yvvaixdg ysysvvyfiivnv. HdXiv di aqvovvrat sivat av
rnv dvdqwnov 8rjdsv and rnv Xdyov oh siqy/ev b Swrfjq iv np
avayysXfjvai ainj) on idov fj ftyryq aov '/at ot a8EXcpot anv
s'§co sarfj'/aaiv, ozt rig fiov iart fvyryq xat a8sXcpoi; '/at
i'/rsivag T'qv 'yeiqa int rnvg fiadrjzdg ecprj' Obroi elaiv oi a8eX-
cpoi fiov '/at fj fvqrqq {'/at d8eXcpot Dind.) ol notovvreg rd
d^eX'Tjfiara rov narqdg fiov. (Mat. xii. 47-50. Compare Mark
iii. 32'; Luke viii. 20.)
Orig. de Princ. IV. 22. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 388.) 'Endv cpdo'/y
0 2wryq 'oi'/ dneardXyv el fiy elg rd nqd^ara rd anoXwXdra
o'i'/ov 'laqafjX,' oi'/ s'/Xafi^dvofiev ravra dg ol nrwyot^ ry dta-
vniq 'E^icovaloi T5jg nrwyeiag rfjg 8iavoiag indvvfioi' Efilcov ydq
b nrcoydg naq' 'E^qaioig dvofidterat' ware vnoXa^elv snt rovg
aaq'/ivovg 'laqayXirag nqoyyovfiivcog rdv Xqiardv inidsSyfiy/ivai.
(Mat. XV. 24.)
Jerome, Adv. Pelag. B. IIL c. 2. (Vallars. Vol. H. p. 768.)
In Evangelio juxta Hebraeos, quod Chaldaico quidem Syroque
sermone, sed Hebraicis literis scriptum est, quo utuntur usque
hodie Nazareni secundum Apostolos, sive ut plerique autumant
juxta Matthaeum, quod et in Caesariensi habetur Bibliotheca,
narrat historia: Ecce mater Domini et fratres ejus dicehant ei:
Johannes Baptista haptigat in remissionem peccatorum: eamus et
haptisemur ab eo. Dixit autem eis: Quid peccavi, ut vadam et
haptiser ah eo? Nisi forte hoe ipsum quod dixi, ignorantia est.
Ibid. Et in eodem volumine : Si peccaverit, inquit, frater tuus
in verbo et satis tibi fecerit, septies in die suscipe eum. Dixit
ihi Simon discipulus ejus: septies in die? Respondit Dominus
et dixit ei: Etiam ego dico tibi, usque septuagies septies. Etenim
in prophetis quoque postquam uncti sunt Spiritu Sancto, inventus
est sermo peccati. (Compare Mat. xviii. 22, and Luke xvii. 4.)^"
° Origen plays on the name Ebionite or Poor, See, for this origin of the
name, Introduction, Gospel of Hebrews.
'" The margin of Tischendorf's MS has To 'louSai'xdv (sc. euayy^Xiov) elii;
i'x,Ei jxETCt TO " EpSofiTjxovTaxt; Ititix" "xa\ yap h toC; TCpotpiQTai; (XETa to xpio^ii)-
vai auTou; h TtveufxaTi aytto supiffXETto (1, Eup£axsTai) ti auTof? Xo'yo; otfJLapTfa?."

GOSPEL OP THE HEBEEWS. 461
Eus. H. E. ILL 39. (The narrative of the woman accused of
many crimes.) (See John vii. 53-viii. 11.?)
Epiph. Haer. L t. 2. h. 30. p. 146. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 441.)
Kat inoiyaav roig fiadyrdg fiiv Xiyovrag' Hov dsXstg sroi-
fi a a CO fiiv aot rd Hdaya cpayslv; Kat airdv dydsv Xiyovra'
My inidvfila insdvfiyaa xqiag roiro rd Hdaya cpa
yslv fied' vfidv;''^^
Origen, Comment, in Mat. tom. XF. § 14. p. 672. (Migne,
Vol. III. p. 1293.) Scriptum est in Evangeho quodam, quod di
citur secundum Hebraeos: si tamen placet alicui recipere ihud
non ad auctoritatem, sed ad manifestationem propositae quae
stionis. "Dixit," inquit, "ad eum alter divi tum: Magister, quid
bonum faciens vivam? Dixit ei: Homo, leges et prophetas fac.
Eespondit ad eum: Feci. Dixit ei: Vade, vende omnia quae pos-
sides et divide pauperibus et veni sequere me. Coepit autem
dives scalpere caput suum, et non placuit ei. Et dixit ad eum
Dominus: Quomodo dicis, legem feci et prophetas? quoniam
scriptum est in lege, Diliges proximum tuum sicut te ipsum; et
ecce, multi fratres tui, filii Abrahae, amicti sunt stercore mo-
rientes prae fame; et domus tua plena est multis bonis, et non
egreditur omnino aliquid ad eos. Et conversus dixit Simoni dis-
cipulo suo sedenti apud se: Simon, fili Joanne, facilius est ca-
melum intrare per foramen acus, quam divitem in regnum coe
lorum." (Mat. xix. 16-24.) > 2
Jerome, Letter 20 to Damasus. (Vallars. Vol. I. p. 64.) Deni
que Matthaeus, qui Evangelium Hebraeo sermone conscripsit, ita
posuit Osanna Baramma, id est Osanna in excelsis. (Mat. xxi. 9.)
Ld. in Mat. xxiii. 35. Pro filio Barachiac, filium Jojadae
reperimus, &c. See before, p. 455.
Eus. Theophania. (See Migne, Vol. VI. p. 685.) Td elg fjfidg
-y'/ov 'E§qaixolg yaqaxrfjqatv EiayyiXiov rfp/ dnstXyv ov '/ard rov
dnoxqixpavrog infjysv, dXXd '/ard roi aadrwg s^y/drog. Tqslg
" Compare Luke xxii, 15. By adding xps'a; and making the words a ques
tion the Ebionites (like the Essenes) avowed their own aversion from animal
food. In the same way the alteration of aV-piSa? into iyxpiSai (see above, first
extract from Epiphanius) was a deliberate change in favour of their own views,
>s See on Justin's quotations of this before, p, 116, The Clem. Hom. 18,
3, 17 make it, "call rae not good,"

462 EXTEA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.
ydq 8ovXovg nsqtslys, rdv fiiv '/araipaydvra rfjv vnaq^tv fisrd
nnqvdv /at aiXrjrqidwv, rdv 8i noXXanXaaidaavza t^ iqyaaiav,
rdv di '/ara'/qixpavra rd rdXavrov sira rdv jiiv djiodsydyvai,
rdv di fisficpdrjvat fidvov, rdv di avy/Xsiadfjvat dsafiwryqiq). (Mat.
xxv. 14.)
Jerome, Comment, in Mat. B. IV. c. xxvii. 16. (Vallars.
Vol. VII. p. 219.) Iste (Barabbas) in Evangelio, quod scribitur
juxta Hebraeos, filius magistri eorum interpretatur, qui propter
seditioiiem et homicidium fuerat coudemnatus.
lUd. c. 51. (Vallars. Vol. VII. p. 233.) In Evangelio, cujus
saepe fecimus mentionem, superliminare Templi infinitae magni-
tudinis fractum esse atque divisum legimus.
Id. Epist. ad Hedih. (Vallars. Vol. I. p. 825.) In Evangelio,
quod Hebraicis literis scriptum est, legimus, non velum Templi
scissum, sed superliminare templi mirae magnitudinis corruisse.
Id. De Vir. III. c. 2. (Vallars. Vol. H p. 817.) Evangelium
quoque quod appellatur secundum Hebraeos et a me nuper in
Graecum Latinumque sermonem translatum est, quo et Orige
nes saepe utitur, post resurrectionem Salvatoris refert: Domi
nus autem quum dedisset sindonem servo Sacerdotis, ivit ad
Jacobum et apparuit ei. Juraverat enim Jacobus, se non co-
mesturum panem ab ilia hora qua biberat calicem Domini, donee
videret eum resurgentem a dormientibus. Rursusque post pau
lulum : Afferte, ait Dominus, mensam et panem. Statimque addi-
tur : Tulit panem et benedixit, ac fregit, et dedit Jacobo justo, et
dixit ei: Frater mi, comede panem tuum, quia resurrexit Filius
hominis a dormientibus.
Ignat. Ep. Smyrn. c. 3. (See before, p. Ul and Note 3.)
Jerome, De Vir. III. c. 16. (Vallars. Vol. II. p. 842.) Scripsit
(sc. Ignatius) et ad Smyrnaeos et proprie ad Polycarpum, com-
mendans illi Antiochensem Ecclesiam in qua et de Evangelio,
quod nuper a me translatum est, super persona Christi ponit
testimonium, dicens: Ego vero et post resurrectionem in carne
eum vidi et credo, quia sit. Et quando venit ad Petrum, et ad
eos, qui cum Petro erant, dixit eis: Ecce palpate me, et videte,
quia non sum daemonium incorporate. (Luke xxiv. 39.) Et statim
tetigerunt eum et crediderunt.
Id. Comment, in Isai. B. XVIII. Prooem. (Vallars. Vol. IV.

ADDITIONAL QUOTATIONS OE EEFEEENCES. 463
p. 769.) Quum enim Apostoli eum putarent spiritum vel juxta
Evangelium, quod Hebraeorum lectitant Nazaraei, incorporate
daemonium, dixit eis: quid turhati estis, &c.? /
Additional quotations or references.
Origen, Comment, in Joann. See before, p. 452.
Jerome, in Es. xl. 11. See before, p. 454.
Id. in Mich. vii. 6. See before, p. 453, and compare Origen,
before, p. 453.
Clem. Alex. Strom. II. 9. See before, p. 452.
Epiph. Haer. XXX. 16. Oda/ovat . . . xat iXddvza, '/at
vcprjyrjadfisvov (cog rd naq' airoig EiayyiXiov nsqtiysi) on yX
dsv,^ ^ xaraXvaat rdg dvaiag, '/at idv fifj navayade rov dieiv
oi itaiaerat dcp' vfidJv y dqyfj.
IS See Eus. H, E. Ill, 36 for quotation of those words as in Ignatius (^Xij-
XuSev for kjaSem), Jerorae raay have quoted from Eusebius, but if so he does
not quote exactly. It is doubtful where the quotation ends in Ignatius. The
passage in Origen which refers to this (see Note on p. Ill) is De Princ. Prol.
c, 8.

464 EXTEA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.

2. PROTEVANGELIUM JACOBI
OK
GOSPEL OF JAMES/
Clem. Alex. Strom. VII. 16. p. 889. 'AXX' dg sni'/sv rolg noXXolg
'/at fisyqt vvv doxel y Maqidfi Xeyw elvai, 8id tjjv rov naiSiov yiv
vyaiv oi'/ ovaa Xeyd' xal ydq fierd rd re/elv airfjv fiatwdeladv
cpaai Ttveg naqdivov evqedyvai.
Justin Martyr, Dial. c. 78. p. 303. See before, p. 121,
Note 21.
Origen, Comment, in Mat. p. 463. (Migne, Vol. III. p. 876.)
Totg de d8eXcpoig 'lyaov, cpaai Ttveg eivat, ex naqaddaewg oq-
fidfievoi rov intysyqafifiivov xard Hirqov EiayysXiov, y ryg §i-
(iXov 'laxdfiov, vlovg 'Iwaycp, '/.r.X.

3. ACTS OF PILATE/
Justin Martyr, Apol. I. 35. p. 76 C. Kat fisrd rd aravqioaai
airdv, s'^aXov xXfjqov int rdv Ifianafidv airov, '/at ifisqiaavzo
savzolg ol aravqdaavrsg airdv. Kat ravra on yiyovs, divaads
fiadelv ix reiv int Hovriov HiXdrov yevofiivwv "Axrcov. (John
XX. 25; Mat. xxvii. 35.) ^
Ihid. I. 48. p. 84 C. 'On 8i xat d-eqansvaeiv ndaag vdaovg
• Jaraes, See Introduction, " Apocrypha, " and note on page 156, The
arguraent on Canonicity founded on those Apocryphal Books — the Protevangeliura
and the Acts of Pilate — is that they are obviously expansions of our Gospels,
and that — they being in existence before the raiddle of the second century — they
i'urnisb an argument for the antiquity of the Gospels,
' Acts of Pilate. See Introduction, " Apocrypha. " Our quotations indicate
the importance attached to this book by Justin and others. It undoubtedly fol
lows the Gospels, notably John. See note on page 174.
2 The casting of lots by the soldiers is not mentioned in the Acts of Pilate
now extant; the division of the garments is.

ACTS OF PILATE. 465
xat vexqovg avayeqelv 6 fjfiirsqog Xqiardg nqoecpyrsidrj d'/oi-
aars rcov XsXsyfiivcov. 'Eari di ravra' tjj naqovaia airov
dXslrat ydXog dg iXacpdg xat rqavfj sarat yXdaaa fioyiXdXwv
rvcpXot dva§Xixpovat xai Xsnqot xadaqiadfjaovrat '/at vsxqot
avaaryaovrat xat nsqinaryaovaiv. "Ort rs ravra inoiyasv, ex
TWV int Hovriov HiXdrov ysvofiivwv "Axrwv fiadslv divaads.
(Isaiah xxxv. 5, 6 ; Mat. xi. 5.)
Tertullian, Apologet. c. 21. Et tamen suffixus multa mortis
illiu^ propria ostendit insignia. Nam spiritum cum verbo sponte
dimisit, praevento carnificis officio. Eodem momento dies me
dium orbem signante sole subducta est. Deliquium utique puta
verunt, qui id quoque super Christo praedicatum non scierunt.
Et tamen eum mundi casum relatum in arcanis vestris hahetis. . . .
Cum discipulis autem quibusdam apud Galileam, Judaeae regio
nem, ad quadraginta dies egit docens eos quae docerent. Dehinc
ordinatis eis ad officium praedicandi per orbem circumfusa nube
in coelum est receptus, multo verius quam apud vos adseverare
de Romulo Proculi solent. Ea omnia super Christo Pilatus, et
ipse jam pro sua conscientia Christianus, Caesari tunc Tiberio
nuntiavit. Eus. H. E. II. 2. Td nsqt T^g ex vex^wv avaffTaffewg toxj
2wryqog fjficov 'lyaov Xqiarov elg ndvrag ydy '/ad 'dXyg rfjg
HaXatarivyg ^s^oy fiiva HiXdrog Tt^sqicj) ^aatXsl '/otvovvrat, 'x.r.X.
(Eus. rests upon Tertulhan 1. c.)
Epiph. Haer. IL 1. 1. h. 50. p. 420. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 884.)
'Ereqot ds 6| airdv (sc. TCffffa^effxatdexaTtTWv) tijv airfjv fiiav
-fjfiiqav dyovrat xat ryv airyv fiiav fjfiiqav vyarsvovrsg '/at rd
fivar'fjqia EnirsXavvrsg , dnd rdv"A'/Twv dfjdsv HiXdrov avyovat
TTjv d'/qi§siav yvqyxivat, iv otg ifig)iqsrat tjj nqd d'/rd xaXavdiov
'AnqtXXiwv rdv Awryqa nsnovdivai. . . . "Ert de yvqafisv dvri
yqacpa "A'/rwv HtXdrov, iv otg ayfiaivst nqd 8exanivre xaXav-
8wv 'AnqtXXiwv rd nddog yeyevyadat. TdXydfj di, dg ix noXXfjg
axqi^eiag s'yvwfisv, iv rfj nqd de'/arqidJv '/aXav8d)v 'AnqiXXiwv
rdv Awryqa nsnovdivai xarstX'fjCpafisv.

30

466 EXTEA-CANONICAL GOSPELS.

4. GOSPEL OF PETER/
petee's docteine. peiek's pkeachikg.
Eus. H. E. VL. 12. "Ersqdg rs avvrsray fiivog airip (sc. 2a-
qa7ziwvi) Xdyog nsqt rov Xsyofiivov '/ard Hsrqov Evayys
Xiov, ov nsnoiyrat dneXiyywv rd xpevdciig iv avnp siqyfiiva, 8ia
rtvag iv rfj '/ard 'Pwaadv naqotxia, nqocpdast T^g slqyjtivyg yqa-
' On the works ascribed to Peter see the Testimony of Eusebius, before,
p. 207. Jerome also in his De Vir, 111. c. 1 says, " JAbri avtem ejus, e guibus
WIUS Actorum ejus inscribitur, alius Eva-agelii, tertius Praedicatioiiis, guartus Apo-
calypseos, quintus Judicii, inter Apocr-yphas scripturas repittantur." The decree
of Gelasius (see before, p, 24) condemns Peter's Gospel, It appears probable
from the extracts in the text that this Gospel taught the ordinary human birth
of Jesus; although this is not quite clear. But it agreed with the Protevange
lium (the 'Book of James') in regarding the "brethren" of Jesus as sons of Joseph
by a forraer marriage. The ' Nazarenes ' who, according to Theodoret, used it,
must have been more Jewish than some of their name, since they regarded Christ
as only a just man. What Origen quotes from it (regarding Christ not being a
bodiless demon) is found in the Nazarene Gospel ; and ou tbe whole it seems to
have been a recension of the Gospel of the Hebrews. Hilgenf. (N, T. extra Can,
rec.) believes it to be older than the Ebionite Gospel. There is a passage in
Justin (Dial, c, 106 ; see before, p, 62, Note 6) where it is said that mention of
the change of Peter's name is raade i-t rots a7TO[AMiQjj,0VEU|Jiaatv auTou, Frora the
imraediately following reference to the change of the names of the Sons of Ze
bedee (which is only found in Mark) it has been usually supposed that Justin
refers to Mark's Gospel as his authority. This is not clear, however. There is
no reason to deny that from tbis passage alone a good case could be made out
for there being a book called 'Peter's Memoirs' (although those who plead that
case are almost bound to hold that "Memoirs" is the equivalent of "Gospel"),
and we are not concerned to deny that Justin might have known and quoted
such a book ; but it is scarcely possible on this one fact to build a whole theory
as to the nature of Peter's Gospel, and still less is it possible to refer to that
Gospel all Justin's quotations from ' The Memoirs, ' The ' Doctrine of Peter '
AtSaxiQ n^Tpou was probably the same work. There is another name, Peter's
Preaching, KijpuYHa JldTpou, which is sometimes called ' The Preaching of Peter
and Paul,' The words of Lactantius are evidence of its existence in his day :
" Sed et futura illis aperuit omnia, quae Petrus et faidus Romae praedicave-mnt, et ea
praedicatio in memoriam scripta pei-mansit, in qua cum alia mira tuw, etiam hoc . . ."
(here follows a prediction of the fall of the Jews and their cities). It is chiefly
known through the frequent quotations of it by Clem. Alex., some of which, refer
ring to the New Testaraent, are in our text. Origen (Coraraent. in Joann. t, 13.
§ 17. Migne, Vol, IV. p, 424) says that Heracleon quoted it. Both Eusebius and
Jerome distinguish the ' Preaching of Peter ' from the ' Gospel of Peter. ' What
relation it had to the account of Peter's Preaching in the Clementines is a dif
ficult question. The extracts which remain in Clem, Alex, and others do not
identify the two works, nor is Hilgenfeld (Nov. Test, extr. Can. rec, p, 55) able
to make out a case for the identity, Credner ascribed the Preaching to the end
of the First Century; and regarded it (Hilgenfeld following him) as the parent
of the Homilies and Eecognitions. See the whole discussion in Credner's Bei-
trSge, p. 348, &c.). An Apocalypse of Peter is mentioned in the Muratorian
Fragraent.

GOSPEL OF PETEE. 467
cpyg elg ereqodd^ovg 8i8aaxaXiag dno'/eiXavrag. 'Acp' yg evXoyov
jiqaysiag naqadsad-at Xiysig, 8t' wv yv siys nsqt rov ^t^Xiov
yvwfiyv nqorid-yatv, ovrw yqdcpwv 'Hfislg ydq, d8sXcpol, xat
Hirqov /at roig 'dXXovg 'AnoardXovg d7Co8sydfisda wg X^iffTov
rd 8i dvdfiart airdv xpev8en'tyqacpa wg sfinEtqot naqatrovftsda,
yivwaxovrsg on rd roiavra oi naqeXd^Ofiev. 'Eyd ydq ysvdfisvog
naq vfilv vnsvdovv rovg ndvrag dqdjj niarst nqoacpiqsadat, '/at
fifjv disXddv rn vn' airdv nqocpsqd fisvov dvdfian Hirqov Eiay
yiXiov, sinov. 'On sl roird iart fidvov rd doxovv vftlv naqiystv
fii'/qoxpvyiav, dvaytvwaxiadw. Nvv de fiadcov on alqiast rtvt 6
voiJg airdv ivscpwXsvsv ix rdv Xsydivrwv fioi, anov8daio ndXiv
ysviadai nqdg vfidg' wg re ddsXcpoi nqoadoxdri fis iv rdysi.
'Hfislg di ddsXcpot, xaraXa^dfisvoi , bnolag yv alqiascog b Maq-
'/la'Udg, '/at savnp yvavnnvro fiy vodv a iXdXsi, a fiadyasads i§
dv Vftlv iyqacpy. EdwydyjiEv ydq naq aXXwv rdv aa'/yadvnov
aird rovro rd EiayyiXiov, rovriart naqd rdv diaddywv rdv '/ar-
aq^afiivcov airov, ovg Aoxyrdg xaXovjisv (rd ydq nXsiova cpqovrj-
fiara i'/sivwv iart rfjg dtdaO'/aXiag), yqyadfisvoi naq airiov, 8isX-
¦dslv, '/at Evqslv rd fiiv nXsiova rofj oqdov Xdyov rov 2coryqog,
rtvd di nqoadtsaraXfiiva , a xat vnsrd^afisv vfilv. Kat ravra
ftiv rd 2aqaniwvog.
Origen, Comment, in Mat. t. 10. c. 17. p. 462. (Migne, Vol.
III. p. 876.) "litovro ovv airdv stvat Iwayip xat Maqiag vldv
rovg de d8scpovg' lyaoi, cpaai nvsg stvat, ix naqaddaswg bq fid fis
voi TOV intysyqafifiivov 'xard Hirqov EiayysXiov, 'fj ryg
§i^Xov'laxci)§ov, vlovg'Iwafjcp ix nqwriqag yvvaixdg, avvcpxy/viag
ainp nqd rfjg Maqiag. (Compare Mat. xiii. 55, 56, and Mark vi. 3.)
Id. de Princip. I. Praef (Migne, Vol. I. p. 119.) Si vero
quis velit nobis proferre ex illo libello, qui Petri Doctrina appel
latur, ubi Salvator videtur ad discipulos dicere: "Non sum dae
monium incorporeum," primo respondendum est ei, quoniam ille
liber inter libros ecclesiasticos non habetur, et ostendendum, quia
neque Petri est ipsa (ista? Zahn) scriptura, neque alterius cujus-
quam, qui spiritu Dei fuerit inspiratus.
Jerome, De Vir. HI. c. 41. (Vallars. Voh. IL p. 869.) Cora
posuit (Serapion) et alium de Evangelio, quod sub nomine Petri
fertur librum ad Rhodensem Ciliciae ecclesiam, quae in haeresin
ejus lectione diverterat. 30*

468 PEOTEVANGELIUM JACOBI.
Theodoret. B. II. Fab. 2. Ol 8i Natwqalot 'lov8aloi elat rdv
Xqtardv rtfidvreg wg dvdqwnov dixaiov xat rip '/aXovfiivij) '/ard
Hirqov EiayyeXicp xeyqyfiivoi.^
Clem. Alex. Strom. L 29. p. 427. (also II. 15. p. 465.) 'Ev
de np Hirqov xyqvyfian evqotg dv vdfinv '/at Xdyov rdv
Kvqtov nqoaayoqevdfievov.
Lbid. VL. 5. p. 762. Aid roird cpyatv b Hirqog slqy-
¦/ivai rdv Kiqtov rolg 'AnoardXoig' "'Edv ftiv ovv Ttg dsX-yay
TOV laqafjX fisravofjaai did roi ovdfiardg fiov niarsvwv sig rov
Qsdv, dcpsd'yaovrai airip al dfiaqriat. Msrd dw'dexa s'ry i^iX-
dsrs sig rdv '/da fiov, fi'fj Ttg eiVr^j, oi'/ yxoiaajtsv."
Ibid. VI. 6. 48. p. 764. 'Ev rip Hsrqov '/yqvyfiari b Ki
qtog cpyat nqdg rovg fiadrjzdg fisrd rfjv avdaraatv "i^sXs^afiyv
Vfidg 8d8sxa fiadyrdg, xqivag dS,iovg, ifinv, ovg b Kvqtog -fjdi
Xyasv '/at 'AnoardXovg ntaroig yyyadfisvog sivat," '/.r.X.
Ihid. VI. 15. p. 804. "Odsv 'xal 6 Hirqog iv np '/y-
qxjyfian nsqt rdv 'AnoardXwv Xiywv cpyaiv 'Hfislg 8i~ avanrv-
^avrsg rdg ^ifiXovg ag siyofisv rdv nqocprjzdiv a ftiv 8id naqa-
^oXdv, a 8i 8t' alvtyfidrwv, a de aidsvri'/wg xal avroXs^st rdv
Xqtardv 'lyaovv dvofia'Qdvnov , svqofisv xat T'fjv naqovaiav avroi
'/at rdv ddvarnv '/at rdv aravqdv xat Tag Xoindg xoXdastg nd
aag offag inoiyaav ainp ol 'lovdaloi, xat t^v syeqaiv xat rfjv
sig ovqavovg dvdXyxpiv nqd rov 'IsqoadXvfia xriadfjvat, xaddg
iyiyqanro. Taira ndvra a edet airdv nadslv xat fisrd airdv
a sarat. Tavra ovv intyvdvrsg intarEiaajiEv rip Qscp did rdv
ysyqafifiEvwv sig airdv.

5. GOSPEL OF THE EGYPTIANS.
Clem. Bom. 2 Epistle. See before, p. 108.
Clem. Alex. Strom. III. 13. p. 553. See before, p. 75.*
Ihid. c. 6. p. 532. T^ 2aXwfiy 6 Kiqtog nvvdavofiivy,
'.'fiiyqt nors ddvarog layvast;" ovy, dg xaxov rov ^iov 'dvrog
1 Theodoret goes on to say that "Justin, philosopher and martyr," wrote
against the Nazarenes; and also Irenaeus tuv 'Ai^ooto'Xcov 5iaSo)(^os, and Origen,
' These two passages refer to the same saying, and Clem, Alex, says it is
from the Gospel according to the Egyptians, On this Gospel see Introduction,

GOSPEL OF THE EGYPTIANS. 469
'/at ryg xriascog novyqdg, " fiiyqig dv," slnsv, "vftslg al yvval'/eg
ri'/ryre," aXX wg t^ dxoXovdiav rfjv cpvai'/yv 8i8da'/wv' ys-
vsast ydq 7idvrwg 'snsrat 'xai cpdoqd.
Ihid. c. 8. p. 540. Ol de dvrtraaadfisvot tjj xriast rov
Qsov dta T^g sicp-yfiov iy/qarsiag, xd'/elva Xiyovat rd nqdg 2a-
Xdfiyv elqy fiiva, dv nqdrsqov Sfivyadyfisv cpiqsrat 8i oifiat iv
Tip xar' Alyvnriovg EvayysXicji. 0aat ydq, on "airdg
slnsv b 2wryq, fjXdov xaraXiaat rd s'qya rfjg dyXeiag'" dyXeiag
fiiv, rfjg inidvfiiag' I'qya de, yivsaiv xal cpdoqdv.
Ihid. c. 9. p. 540. "Odsv sl'/drcog nsqt avvrsXsiag fiyviaavrog
rov Xdyov fj laXdfiy cpyai' "jiiyqt rivog ol dvdqwnoi dnodavovv-
rai" . . . ano'/qivsrat 6 Kiqtog' "jiiyqig dv ri'/rwaiv al yvval-
xeg."2 Ihid. p. 541. Ti ds; oiyt '/at rd i^fjg rdv nqdg 2aXcofiyv
slqyfiivcov inicpiqovaiv ol ndvra fidXXov y rip '/ard rfjv dXydsiav
svayysXixip aTOtyyaavTEg xavdvt,- Oajiivyg ydq airfjg, '/aXdg ovv
inoiyaa ftfj rs'/ovaa " * tug ov dsdvrcog T^g ysviaewg naqaXafi^avo-
fiivyg' afiel^erat Xiywv 6 Kiqiog, ndaav cpdye ^oravqv rfjv di
nr/qiav s'yovaav fifj cpdyyg.
Orig. Hom. in Luc. See before, p. 82.
Epiph. Haer. II. t. 1. h. 62. p. 514. Tyv de ndaav airdv nXd
vyv '/at rfjv rfjg nXdvyg airdv 8ivafiiv eyovaiv e§ dnoxqicpwv
rtvdv, fiaXiara and rov '/aXovfiivov Alyvnriov EiayyeXiov, cp
Ttveg rd ovofia inidsvro rovro' sv avrcp ydq noXXd rotaira dg
iv naqa^iarcj) fivaryqtwddg ix nqoawnov rdv Acoryqog dvacpi-
qerai, dg airov dyXovvrog rolg fiadrjzalg, rdv airdv etvat Ha
riqa , rdv avrdv eivai Yldv, rdv airdv eivat "Ayiov Hveijia.
Jerome, Comment, in Mat. Prooem. See before, p. 99.
^ See reference to the same saying in Clem. Alex. Excerpta ex Theod. 67,
p, 985, "Otov o' Suti^o Tcpo; SaXtiifiijv Xe'ytj, [x^ypt to'te Elvai Mvarov, a/^pc? av
al yuvaCxE; TixTaxitv. See also Orac. Sibyll. II. 163, 164, Nijiriot ou5£ voouvte?
o'i' KJvtxa cpuXa yuvatxuv }x-f\ TtxTtooiv &pu to li^po; [JiEpo'ituv a'vSptonwv, (Quoted
by Hilgenf,)

470

PASSAGES OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN OCCURRING IN
EARLY WRITERS/

Alex. Strom. II. 9. See before, under Gospel of the
Hebrews p. 452.
Ihid. I. 28. p. 425. "Fiveade 8s 8d'/tfioi rqans^lrat," ^ rd
ftiv dno8oxifidl^ovreg, rd di 'xaXdv xarkyovreg. (Comp. 1 Thess.
V. 21.) From Tract. Schabbath XVI. (See Hilg. p. 16.)
¦'BDiN^ N^N Ti^nN riTB73n Nn^tl'iN T? nnsab sb (V. 17)-
N'lns Nn'nsi N'na;''n''nis fiam Nn'^i'iiN b?
'linT. (V. 27-32)

Acts, xi. 2-4.^ Aiyet ydq 6 nqocpynxdg Xdyog' TaXainwqoi
slatv ol dixpvyoi, ol Stard^ovrsg ry '/aq8ic^, ol Xiyovrsg' Tavra
ndXttt rj/ovaafiev xat int rdv nariqwv fjfidv, fjfielg 8e fjfiiqav
• E^ fjfiiqag nqoadeydfisvot oiSiv rovrwv swqd/afiev. Avdyroi, avfi-
¦ In the text are here inserted, as interesting to students, sorae passages which
have not been included in the extracts in this Book. For other passages which
cannot he referred to our Gospels, and which occur without reference to the
source from which they are taken, see on pages 107, 108 the extracts from
" 2 Clement," c. 4, 5; c, 5. !J-4; c, 8, 5; c. 12, 2, on pages 125-127 the extracts
from Justin Martyr, Dial. c. 35; o. 47; c. 51; c, 69; c, 88; c, 106, See several
also under the " Clementine Homilies, " especially tbe references to III. 50, 53,
56 ; XII, 29; XVL 21 ; XIX, 20,
' See before, p. 82 and note. The words occur in Clem, Hora, II, 51 ;
III, 50; XVIIL 20; Const. App, IL 36, 37; Epiph, Haer. 44, 2; Orig. in Joann.
Tom, XIX, 2 (Opp, IV. 283)— ^vtoXt) 'lTt)<rou ; Dion, Alex, apud Eus, H. E. VII,
7. 3 — aitoaToXiXTQ ^uvi^ ; Jerorae, Ep. 119 (or 152) Salvatoris verba diceniis estote
probati nummularii. See Hilgenf., Ev. sec. Heb., p. 27,
» See before, p. 108, Note 10.

PASSAGES OF UNKNOWN OEIGIN. 471
§dXsr£ savrovg t,iXc^, Xd^sre dfineXov nqwrov fiiv cpvXXoqoel,
etra ^Xaardg yivsrat, fisrd ravra 'dficpa^, sira aracpvXfj naqs-
ary/vla ' o'irwg xat b Xadg fiov d-zaraaraaiag '/at dXixpstg saysv,
Enstra dnoXyxpsrat rd dyadd.
Ihid. xii. 2. See before, p. 108.
Ihid. XX. 35. Mvyfiovsveiv re rdiv Xdywv rov Kvqiov 'lyaov
on airdg shzs, Ma'/dqidv ian 8t8dvaL jtaXXov jj Xaji§dvstv.
Origen, De Orat. 2. (Migne, Vol. I. p. 417.) Eine ydq b
'lyaoig rolg fiadqralg airov' Alrelrs rd fisydXa '/at rd fii/qd
vfilv nqoarsdyasrat, '/at airslrs rd inovqdna '/at rd sniysta
nqoarsdyasrat vfilv. (Mat. vi. 33.)
Comp. Clem. Alex. Strom. I. 24. p. 416. Alrelads ydq, cpyat,
rd fisydXa '/at rd fir/qd vfilv 7cqoaTsdyaerat.
Cod. D. Luke VL 4 &c. (from Tisch. Gr. Test). Tfj airy fjfii-
qijc deaadfievdg rtva iqya^dfievov rip aafifidrijt elnev aircp. "Av-
dqwns, sl fiiv oldag ri 7toiElg, fia'/dqtog sl' sl de fifj otdag,
intxardqarog xat naqa^dryg rov vdfiov.
Ld. in Mat. xx. 28 &c. (from Tisch. Gr. Test). 'Yfielg ds tyrslrs
ix fiEi'/qov ai^fjaai '/at ex fist^ovog s'Xarrov sivat. Elasqydfis-
voi di xat naqaxXyd-ivrsg 8stnvyaai ftfj dva'/Xsivsad at sig roig
i^iyovrag rdnovg, ftynors ivdo^dreqdg aov ineXdjj xat nqoa-
eXdwv 0 detnvor/X'Tjzwq elnjj aot' "Ert '/drw ydqei, '/at '/ar-
atayvvdfjarj. Edv di avaneafjg elg rdv yrrova rdnov, xat insXd-fj
aov 'rjzrwv iqsl aot b 8stnvo'/Xyrwq' 2ivaye srt dvw, '/at sarat
aot rovro yqfjatjiov.
Justin Mart. Apol. L. 38. p. 11 D. See before, p. 63, Note 4.
Ld. Dial. C. 101. p. 328 C. See before, p. 63.
Origen, Hom. in Jerem. XX. 3. (Migne, Vol. Ill p. 531.)
Legi alicubi — quasi Salvatore dicente — et quaere sive quis per
sonam figurarit Salvatoris, sive in memoriam adduxerit ac verum
sit hoc quod dictum est — ait autem ipse Salvator, "Qui juxta
me est, juxta ignem est: qui longe a me est, longe est a regno."

JENA: PRINTED BV ED. FROMMAHN.

E E R A T A.

age 4, line

4, for & nobis,

read

uobis &,

ir 6, M

10, insert comma after

" fuit "

.. 14, „

9, for i-ir\7iil>opr)$rifiey,

read

i-:r\Tipo<l>op^8ri/iev.

II 18, 1,

18, 11 'looitwov P'y',

1,

'Icodvvov a')3'y.

11 21, 1,

5, II Hjeres. Tom. I. p. 941, n

Migne, II. 460.

II 26, 1.

8, II KpaTv0evTa,

II

KparvBivTa.

1, 26, ,1

12, 11 K\^o0iov,

II

KKfdPiov.

M 44, n. 2, 1. 7, M Rhosse,

11

Bhossus.

II 45, line 12, ,i ndrtpa,

II

Tlarepa.

II 46, tl

12, 11 Kipiov,

II

Kvpiov.

II 46, 1,

13, 11 Zvvaixiwv,

II

Svvdfieav.

II 51, M

2, omit comma after

' ' fia-yy4\iov "

II 54, ,1

18, for H. E. III. 40,

read

ff. E. III. 39.

1, 54, 1,

23, 11 kvifiapTvpet,

11

^-KlfiapTVpit,

II 59, 1,

29, 11 "Memoirs,"

11

Authorities.

^ -^^ ( CLAIMS TO CITE THE
' " ( Memoirs,

1 "

II 62, II
cites his Authorities.
II 62, n. 1,
1. 12, II words are found,
11
words were found.
II 64, line
7, after ffvyreTaxBai, insert
yeypa-KTat.
1. 64, ,1
14, for Dial. c. 106,
read
I)ial. c. 105.
1, 73,n.l,
1. 17, 11 II. 26,
11
III. 26.
II 75, line 12, insert period after
" TpoTp4\ptt(T6at"
M 75, ,1
16, for Strom. III. 553,
read
III. 13. 91, 92, p. 553.
1, 125, n. 1
1. 6, „ XVI. 2,
11
XVI. 21.
It 126, n. 2
1. 5, insert comma after
" Hebrews"
II 127, n. 5
I. 8, after "books," substitute
comma
for colon.
11 134, line
2, for Strain. I. 409,
read
Stro-m. I. 21, p. 409.
1, 144, n. 3
I. 5, 11 usages.
11
usage.
II 148, line 13, after Mat. xv. 28, add
Hom. III. 50 (Mark xii. 24)
II 149, II
17, for Hceres. II. c.
read
ffmres. II. t.
11 162, 11
8, ,1 H. E. IV. 49,
11
ff. E. IV. 29.
11 162, 11
16, 11 Ad Autol-yc. II.
11
Ad Autolyc. II. 13.
11 173, II
19, 11 eKaa-TOy,
,1
CHOCTTOJ.
,1 173, 11
20, add commas after
' ' Katpoiis " and " nov "
11 174, 1,
7, for 77 B,
read
77 D. 31
474

EREATA.

Page 184, line 5 from bottom, for third, read
11 187, 11 16, for Emres. LI. h
II 197, last line, for e7K€xefpii7To, n
11 198, line 25, for Letter from, n
11 199, II 17, 11 e-irefiyj/ev fxe, ii
11 205, 1, 29, 11 k4v, 11
,1 267, 11 4, 5,
11 268, head-line, for second timothy, read
II 338, under Papias, the extract on p. 339 ought to
II 338, line 16 from bottom, for come, read
11 400, II 1, for p. 390, ii
11 408, 11 17 from bottom, for p. 391, n
11 408, 11 14 11 ¦ 11 p. 394,
11 442, II 3, after " ft^vToiiy, " insert
II 445, head-line and line 1, for testament, read
11 452, line 7, for p. 67, n
11 456, 11 8, 11 Hebrew's, h
II 470, 11 12, II Acts xi. 2-4, n

fourth.
ffceres. LIII.
ivsKexelpKrTo. Letter of.
l-n-eii\fi4 juc.
delete both lines.
TITUS.
be the first on p. 338.
came.p. 394.
p. 394.
p. 397.
Mark xii. 27.
testaments. p. 67.
Hebrews. Clem. Rom. Ep. 2. o. 11. 2-4.

Note. — After the first eight sheets (128 pp.) of the text were printed off, it was '
resolved to give the references more minutely. After that Clem. Alex, has the
references as in Dindorf, with Potter's pages ; and Epiphanius ia given with minute
references to facilitate verification.

INDEX.

Abdias, Apostolical History by, cvii
Abgar of Edessa, i
Abraxas, li
Acts (Apocryphal) of Andrew and Matthias,
of Barnabas, of Bartholomew, of John,
of Matthew, of Paul and Thecla, of
Peter and Paul, of Phihp, of Philip in
Hellas, of Thaddeus, of Thomas, cvi
Acts of the Apostles, 196-206
Acts of Pilate, ci, 173, 464
Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria (Soc, H.
E, I. 6), 329
Alexandrian Church, 13 n.
Alford's Coram,, 272 n.
Alogi, 0x1, 436-438
Anastasius Sinaita on Canon, 28 and n.
Andreas Csesar. on Gospels, 59 ; on Apoeal.,
338
Andrew, Acts of, cvi ; Gospel of, ciii
Andrew and Matthias, Acts of, cvi
Anger's Synop,, 393 n,, 404 et seq.
Anglican Articles on Canon, 40
Apelles, Gospel of, cui
Antoninus Pius, Ep, of, 367
Apocalypse, 336-358 ; note on, 357
Apocalypses, Apocryphal, cvii
Apocryphal Literature, xcvi (see Table of
Contents)
Apollinaris on Paschal controversy, xciii,
194 ; on Papias, 58
ApoUonius on Apoeal,, 340
Apost. Constit. on Canon, 25 and n, , 205
Apost, Fathers and Synoptists, 102-113
Apostolicon, Marcion's, 409
Archelai Disput,, 390 and n,
Arethas, CEcumen., on Apoeal,, 338
Athanasius —
Ad Serap,, Ep. 1. 299, 310, 325
Biogr. note, 131
Canon of, Festal Epistle, 13 and u,, 284,
353
Cont, Apollin,, 310
Cont. Arian— Or. 1, 317, 353 ; Or, 2. 353 ;
Or. 3, 299 ; Or. 4. 325
De Decret. Nicen. Syn., 284
De S. Trin., 317
Opp,, tom, ii. 13. 299, 311, 317, 330
Synopsis ascribed to, 15 and n,, 299, 311,
317, 353

Atbenagoras, Legatio —
1. 11, 131
10. iSi, 219
12, 132, 181, 22B
13. 202, 219
16. 202, 23s, 259
32. 132
33. 146, 162
34. 219
36. 342
37. 259
Aube, 365 n.
Augustine, biogr, note, 22; Canon,. 22; De
Consen. Evang, , 142 n,
Barcabbas, xlvii n.
Baring-Gould's 'Lost and Hostile Gospels,'
456 n.
Barnabas, Epistle of, i (see Table of Con
tents)
2, 6, 168
4, 3, 14. 102
4. 9, 222
4, 12. 215
4. 13, 251 n,
5. 1, 168
5, 6. 272
5. 7, 13, 168
5, 9, 12, 102, 103, 168
6, 6, 7, 9, 169
6, 15. 237
7, 2, 9. 169
7. 2. 196, 262
7. 11. 103
8. 5, 169
9. 7. 169
11. 10. 169
12. 5. 169
12. 7. 248
12. 11, 103
13, 7, 215
14, 1. 154
15. 5. *S3
15. 8. 103
15, 9, 142
15, 10, 319
16, 8. 170
19. 1, 12. 170
19, 8. 233

476

INDEX.

Bamabas, Epistle of — conti-nued.
19. 11. 104
21. 2, 6. 170
21, 6, 251 n,
Bamabas, Gospel of, Apocr., cii
Bartholomew, Gospel of, cii ; Acts of, cvi
Basilides, xlvii (see Table of Contents), 173,
389 and n.
Baur —
Evangelien, Ixx, cx, 221 n,, 253 n,, 258 n,,
365 u.
Gnosis, lxiv, 159 n.
Beroea, Gospel in, Ixxi et seq.
Bleek, 22 in., 272n, , 28on,, 282n,, 285 n.,
419 n.
Books rejected by Cath, Ap. Eom. Ch., 24
Bretschneider, cx
Bruckner, 301 n., 312 n,
Bruns. Can. Apost,, 20
Bryennios, ii, viii, ixn,, xviii n,, xxi n.
Bunsen's 'Analect. Antenic,,' 25 n,, 26 n,, 95
Hippolytus, xlviii
Burgon's Photograph, 150 n,, 152 n,
Caius, Ixxx, 210, 279, 343, 436 n.
Canon Pasch., 345
Canon, Testimonies to, 18-41
Canones Eccles. qui dicuutur Apostolorum,
26
Carpocrates, 411 et seq. and n,
Carthage, Third Counoil of. Canon of, 20
Caspari, cxv n,
Cassiodorus Inst. Div. , 352
Cataphrygians, see Montanists
Catholic Epp,, 289-291
Cave, Hist, Lit,, 427 n,
Celsus, Ixxxiv, 369-378 ; biogr, note, 369
Cerinthus, 384
Christlieb on Tiibingen School, xcvn.
Chrysostom on Canon, 23 ; Hom. vi, 379
Cleraent of Alex,, Ixxxi (see Table of Con
tents)
Adumbr, in Pet,, 147, 202, 277
Do. 2 Jno., 328
Do. Jude, 332
Pffldag. I. 5. 240
6. 229, 246, 307
8. 220
II. 12. 343
IIL 11. 322
44. 332
V. 19, 252
Strom. I. X, 134, 250, 252, 263, 267
II. 259, 263, 278, 322, 416, 452,
463, 470
III. 75, 129, 146, 147, 162, 226, 227,
235, 260, 263, 296, 332, 390
andn,, 431, 468, 469, 470,
471
IV, X, 232, 240, 246, 289, 296, 307,
391. 419, 420
V, 202, 254, 452
VI. 250, 277, 296, 342, 468
VII. 50, Si, 417, 464
Clementine Homs., Ixiii (see Table of Con
tents)

Clem. Hom. II. 148, 438, 439
HI. 134, 148, 163, 184, 203, 439-
444
VIII. 135, 163, 443
IX. 163, 443
XI. 164, 184, 443
XII. and XVI. 443
XVII, 164, 443
XVIIL 135,444
XIX. 135, 148, 164, 184, 236, 241,
444
Clera. Recog,, lxiv, 204
Clement of Rome, viii (see Table of Con
tents)
Ep. L 2. 1. 196
5. 5. 209, 230
7. 3, 255
9, 2, 273
10. 1. 273, 292
12. 1. 292
13. 2. 104, 155
16. 1. 105, 142
16. 1, 171 n,, 243
17, 1, 5, 273 ; 2. 292 ; 7. 336
18. 1. 196
19. 1. 273
20. 4. 222
21. 9. 273
23. 1, 292
24. 1, 5. 222
29. 1. 256
30. 1. 293, 302
31. 2. 170, 293
32, 1, 215
34. 8. 222
35. 5. 215
36. 2. 273
37. 4. 222
38. 1, 4. 251; 2. 215, 293, 302
43. 6. 170
45. 2. 273
46, 8. 105, 15s; 5- 238; 7. 215
49, 1, 6. 171, 223, 233; 5. 302
59, 2. 302 ; 3. 155
61. 1. 302
Ep, II. xviii, (see Table of Contents)
II. 1. 196; 8, 216
1. 233; 2. 65 n.; 4. 106; 7. 155.
266
3, 1. 171; 2. 106
4, 2. 106 ; 5. 107
5, 2-4. 107
6. 1. 106, 155 ; 6. 274 ; 9. 171
8. 5. 107, 155
9, 3, 223 ; 5, 171 ; 7, 233 ; 11. 106
11, 6. 274 ; 7. 223
12. 1, 256 ; 2, 108, 468
13, 4. 206
14, 2. 238 ; 5. 223
16, 1, 256
16. 3. 313 ; 4, 303
17, 3. 233 ; 5, 107 ; 7, 336
18, 2. 243
19. 1. 256 ; 2, 238
20. 6. 256
Epistles ascribed to Clera, Rom, , xxiii

INDEX,

477

Cod. Alex., Canon of, viii, ix, 23
Cod, Claromont, Canon of, 27 and n.
Cod. D., 471
Cod. Sin., Canon of, ii, xxv, 12
Cod. Vat., Canon of, 12
Colossians, Ep, to, 247-250
Conf, Basil. Posterior on Canon, 37
, Conf, Bohoem. ou Canon, 39
Conf. Fid, Gallic, or La RocheUe, 38 and n,
Conf. Helvet, Prior, 37
Conf. Helvet, Posterior, 38
Conf,, Old Scottish, 39
Conf. Westmiust., 40
Conf. Wirtemberg, 40 n.
Consummation of Thomas, cvi
Corinthians, 1 Ep, to, 222-229
11 2 Ep. to, 230-232
Cotterill's 'Peregrinus Proteus,' 65 n., 218
n., 368 n.
Councils— Laod,, 18; Carth,, 20; Trullan,
27 n. , 29 ; Trent, 20 n, , 30 ; Jerus, , 33 n, ,
... 34
Cramer s Catena, 241, 338
Credner, 18 n, ; Gesch,, Ixxx, Ixxxiv, 24 n.,
27 n,, 28 n,, 30 n., 307 n., 466 n, ; Bei
trage, lxiv n,, Ixvii
Curetonian Syriac, 2 n.
Cureton, Ignatius, xxvii
Cyprian —
Adv, Jud,, 1. 20. 282
De bono patient., 309, 325, 350
De eleemos., 350
De exhort, mart., 11, 282
De Hser, Baptiz., 329
Bp. 28 (al. 26) 324
Ep. 68 (al. 56) 309
Ep. 63, 350
Ep. 69 (al. 76) 324
Cyril of Jer., Ixx ; Canon of, 19, 299, 353 ;
Catech., 139
Cyril Lukar on Canon, 33 and n.
Damasus, 24
Davidson's 'Introduction to N. T.,' xciii,
cix, 156 n., 221 n., 239 n,, 253 n,, 303 n.
Descent of Christ to the under world, ci
DiUmann, 333 n.
Dindorf, 427 n,
Diognetus, Ep, to —
3, 198
4. 234
5. 226, 230, 245
7. 179
9. 127, 217, 306
10. 179, 321
11. 65 andn., 179, 257
12. 226
Dionysius of Alex., Ep. ad Basil, 86, 185,
345 (Bus. H. E. VI. 41)
Dionysius of Cormth, 44 and n. (Bus, H, E.
IV. 23)
Docetse, 425 et seq,
Donaldson's Apostolical Fathers, iii, viin,,
xvi n,, xxiv, xxv, xxxiv, Ixxx
11 'Christian Literat.,' 65 n., 66 n,,
179 n,, 194 n.

Donaldson in 'Theol, Rev.,' viii n.
Dosithei Conf, , 34
Dressei on Ignatius, xxix, xxxvii; Clemen
tines, lxiv
Drummond on John and Justin, cix n,, 178
Duae viffi, vel Judicium Petri, i n.
Easter, date of, 13 n,
Ebedjesu catal, libr, Syr,, 345
Ebionites, Ixix, 431 et swq. ; Gospel of, Ixxiv
Eichhorn, 394 n.
Ellicott (Cambridge Essays), Ixxvii n,
Eneratites, Gospel of, ciii
Enoch, Book of, vii n.
Ephesians, Epistle to, 237-242
Epiphanius, biogr, note, 95; Canon of, 21
and n., 165, 285, 299, 353 ; on Quarto-
decira,, 195
Hser. I. 2, 2, 335
24, 391
26. 284
28. 384
29. 455
30. 139, 412, 434, 456 et seq.,
459. 46 1) 463
31, 299
33. 423 ei seq.
- 34, 330
36, 420
42, 241, 285, 397, 400, 40S
!fi '^^^
46, 456
48, 435
50, 465
51, 95-98, 139, 149, 165, 186,
187, 290, 354, 355, 436 et seq.
54. 429
62. 409
66, 318
69, 186, 285
70, 285
76, 311, 318
77, 299, 355
Sch, 4, 7, 15. 410
19. 402
29, 44. 403
34, 35, 40. 404
47, 48, 52, 53. 405
58-61. 406
63, 64, 72, 407
Epistles, in general, 207 (Eus. H. E. III. 3)
Esdras, vii u.
Essenes, lxxvi
Eusebius —
Ad Marinum, 151
Canon of, 10, 164, 185, 206, 453 (H. E.
III. 25)
Canon, as whole, views of, 10 n.
Chron. ad A, 2 et 3 Claud,, xxviii n., xii,
148
Chron. ad A, 14 Domit. 186
Chron. ad Olymp., 53
De Eccles. Theol. III., 299
De Martyr Pal., 283
Dem, Evang, , III, 5. goet seq, ; 140, 298 ;
8, 352 ; V. 3. 283, 329

478

INDEX.

Eusebius — contiiiiied.
Onomasticon, Ixx
Prsep. Evang., 283
Theophan., IV. 12, 453, 459, 461
Hist. Eccl. I. 7. 137, 163 (Jul. Afric.)
12. 298
13. I
II. 1. 298
2,465
16. 149
17. 205, 283
22, 211, 264
23. 127, 199, 290, 298
25, 212
HI, 3, 207, 211, 283, 290, 298,
31°. 317
4. 164, 206, 265, 310
18. 353
20. 127
23. 184, 186
24. 87 et seq., 185, 352
25. 8 n., 298, 310
27, 432, 453
28. 343
29. 353
32. 258
34. X n,
36. 53, III u.
37. 65, 283
39. Clem. Bom,, x ; Papias,
II n., 141, 167, 197,
305, 321, 352, 461
40. 54 et seq., 451
IV. 3. 67 n., 71 n.
7. 389, 391
9-365
11- 394
14. 305
18. 339
22. 2 n., 128, 451
23. Dion, of Corinth, ix, 44,
197
24. 342
26. Melito, 43
29. Tatian, 210
49. 162
V. 1. 158, 180, 218, 257, 306,
321, 340
2. 198, 306, 340
3. 24s, 257
4. 159 n.
6.x8, 67 n,, 71 n,, 322
10, Pantaenus, 133
13, 397
18. ApoUonius, 340
20. 46
22. 23. Pasch. Controv.,
189-192
26. 276
31. 183
VL 13, 277
14, -^^ etseq., 184, 277, 289,
290, 296, 307, 322
17- 433
19, 378

Eusebius — contirmed.
Hist. Eccl. VI. 20. 210, 279
25. 8 et seq., 87 n., 159 n,,
163, 205, 290
41, 282
vn, 10, 345
24. 346
25. 185, 290, 324, 346, 436
Fabricius, Cod. Apoc, l.xix n,, xcviii n.,
xcix n, , 456 n,
FirmiUan, Bp, ad Cypr., 317
Fleischer, 148 n.
Formula Concord, on Canon, 36
Fourth Gospel, cviii (see Table of Contents)
Froude, J, A,, Ixxxiv n,
Galatians, Ep. to, 233-236.
Gebhardt and Harnack, 'Pat. Apost.,' vin,,
ix n,, X n,, xi n,, xxv
Gelasius on Canon, 23 and n,
Gieseler, ' Ch. Hist, , ' 434 n.
Glaucias, xlix, xcix
Gloag, Eev, Dr, 209 n,, 237 n,, 255 n,
Godet, cxi n., cxii n.
Gospel, Apocryphal, of Andrew, Barnabas,
Bartholomew, Judas Iscariot,
Judas Thaddaeus, Matthias,
Peter, Philip, Thomas, Twelve,
Apostles, cii and notes
11 of Eve, of Perfection, of Seth, of
Truth, ciii and notes
11 of the Ebionites, Ixxiv
II ofthe Egyptians, xxii, lxxvi, 468 et
seq.
II of Jaraes, c, 464 et seq.
11 of the Hebrews, Ixviii (see Table of
Contents), xliv, 451-463 ; Ebionite
form, 456 et seq.
11 of Nicodemus, ci
11 of Peter, 466 et seq.
Gospels, 53-101
11 extra-canonical, 451-469
Greg, Nazian,, carm. 33. 318
Greg, W. R,, 'Enigmas of Life,' xcviii
Hadrian to Min, Fid,, 364; to Servianus,
366
Harmonies, ciii
Harnack, Zeit des Ignatius, xxviii
Heathen, testiraonies of, 361-379
Hebrews, Ep, to, 272-288
Plefele, iv n,, viii n., Ixxxiv, 27 n, 95 n.
Hegesippus, Ixxvii (see Table of Contents),
xi, 2 n., 127 et seq., 227; Phot, Cod.,
128
Heracleon, 419-422
Heretics, testimonies of, 383-446 ; tabular
lists of, 447
Hermas, xxiv [see Table of Contents)
Mand, I. 1, 109, 143
II, 2, 294, 303
IV 1, 1. 109
V. 2, 7, 15s
IX. 1. 294
8. 109

INDEX. 47

iJevmsitS—contin-ued. Mand. X. 2. 5, 238

Hippolytus, Eef. Omn. HiBi:— continued
VII, 34. 432

.^ 3, 2. 337

35, 419

XI. 5. and 9, 294

42, 425
XII. 1. 1. 295
VIII, 9.425
3. 5. 174
10. 419, 426
5. 2. 295
18, 192
6. 3. 109, 295
19, 434
Sim, V. 5, 2. 175
IX. 12, 419
6, 1, no
X. 4, 397
6, 2, 3, 175
19. 397
7. 2. 224
^ 20, 429
VIII, 3. no.
ets Ta ayta @eo^., 147
IX. 12. 1, 17s
Trepl avaardcT., 279
13. 5, 239
Trept TT)? ovcTeA, T, Kocr,, 280, 296
l^- S- 3°3
Trepl xapitTlit, 147
20. 2, no
Holtzmann, 159 n.
21. 3. 303 (cf. ix, 14, 6)
Hormisdas, 24
?^- J43'
Hort, lii, 420 n,, 4240,
29, 3, no
Vis, I, 3. 2, 336
Ignatius, xxvi (see Table of Contents)
,. 4,1,337
Eph, 2. 8, 16. 224
II. 2. 4, 196
5. no
2. 7, 337
10, 256
2, 8, 108
11, in, 320
4. 1. 337
12. 239
III. 5. 1. 337
14. 19. Ill
6. 5. 108
16, 338
7- 1- 313
17, in, 171 ,
9. 5, 7. 109, 275, 293
18, HI, 171, 216
11. 3. 303
20, 216
IV. LIO. 337
Magn, 5, 196
^- ]¦ 337
7. 239
2. 4. 303, 337
8. 172
2. 6, 109
9, III
3, 4, 303, 313
10, 224
Hermas and Apocalypse, 336 n.
Mart, Ig, 2. 112
Hesse, Ixxx, Ixxxi
Philad, 2, 172, 196, 239, 251
Hilary (Ps. c and de Trin.), 355
5, 42;
Hilgenfeld, in., ii, iv n,, ix n.
159 n-.
7, 172, 224
221 n,, 237 n,, 301 n,, 365 n
. 393 u,.
8. 42, 243
402, 403, 404, 406, 408, 456 11,
, 459 u.
9. 43i 172
Barnabas, ii, ix n.
11. 216
Clem, Rora,, xix, xx
Polyc, 1, 251
Einleitimg, Ixxx
2, 112
Kritische Untersuchungen, lxiv,
Ixvi, Ixvii
5. 239
N, T. extra-Can, Eec, i n,, iv
n., Ixviii,
Eom. 5, and 9. 224
cvii
7, 172
Pat, Apost, Proleg,, xxv
Smyrn, 1. in, 216
Hippolytus on Apocalypse, 345
3, III, 451, 462
Cont, Hser, Noeti, 147
5. 7, 43
Eef, Oran, H^r,—
6. 112
V. 7. 385 et seq.
9. 10. 262
11. 19, 23, 26. 389
11. 225, 243
12. 16, 17, 21. 388
TraU. 8. 172
VI. 9. 383
11. Ill
10. 14, 16, 19. 384
Classification of quotations, xxx
29. 34, 35. 417
Irenaeus and Hippolytus on Basilides, liii
VII. 19. 1
Irenaeus, I. 1. 257, 259
20. 389
3. 1, 4, 5. 416
22, 173, 391
3, 2. 414
26, 392
3. 5, 415
26. li, 391, 392
3. 6, 45, 414
27. 173, 390> 393
6, 3, 45
29. 420
8, 1, 414
31. 397, 425
8, 8, 415
480

INDEX.

Irenaeus — continued.

Irenaeus — (cmtinued.

1. 11. 1. 413

V, 30. 3. 341

14. 3. 408

33. 3. 53, 245

15, 1. 432

36. 1, 2. 72, 167, 183

16. 1. 424
Ep, ad Florin, xxxiv, 46 (Bus. H. E. V. 20)
16. 3. 266, 328
26, 1, 2, 4, 411, 459
Jacobi, xviii n.
25. 6. 412
James, Gospel of, or Protevangel, c
;Ep.
26. 2. 431, 452
of, 292-300
27. 2. 394, 408
Jerome on Gospel of Hebrews, Ixx e
seq.;
I. Prffif., 2, 413; 422
Canon of, 21 ; Bp. II. ad Paulin,
165,
II. 4. 1. 419
187, 287, 291, 308, 311, 326, 3SS
14. 7. 257, 259
Adv. Jovm., L 26. 188, 256
22. 4. 249
n. 3.435
22. 5. 71, 182
Biogr. note, 99
30. 9, 276
Com. in Is,, 140, 165, 171, 287, 356
454,
35. 4. 45
455, 458, 462, 463
III. 1, 66, 145, 159, 182
Ezech., 455, 458
3. 3. X, 263
11 Dan., 188
3. 4. xxxiv, 182, 266
II Hos., 140
4, 1, 2. 46
II Mic, 453
6, 5. 23s
11 Mat. Proem., 74, 99, 187,
430,
7. 1. 231, 252
454, 461, 462, 469
7. 2, 235
II Mat, Prolog,, 140, 287
9, 1. 129
II John, Prsef. ad Damas, loi.
140
9. 2, 130
11 Bp. to Gal., 288
10. 1. 162
11 Ep. to Eph., 242, 453, 458
10. 6. 145
11 Ep, to Philem., 270
11. 1. 183
11 Bp. to Titus, 260, 267, 287,
335
11. 7. 67, 145, 182, 395, 414, 432,
De Vir. 111. (or Catal. Script. Eccles.
)
452
L 149,311
11. 8. 68, 69, 435, 436
2- 299, 454, 462
11. 9. 229, 414
3. 139, 454
11. 12. 414
4. 335
12. 12. 397, 408
5. 213, 286
14. 1. 67, 200, 249, 263, 397
7. 165, 166, 206
16. 1. 432
8.149
16. 2. 130
9, 187, 326, 330, 339, 355
16. 3, 9. 219, 235
15, 274
16. 5. 322
16, 451, 462
16, 8, 322, 328
18, 57 (Papias), 330
23, 8, 228
24, 340
33, ix
25.74
IV. 8. 4. 245
36, 133 (Pantsenus)
9, 2, 307
41. 467
11. 4. 276
59, 210
13. 4, 225
61. 34S
16. 2. 29s
6?. 138
16. 5, 307
74, 352
20. 11. 340
Dial, II. adv. Pelag., 152, 455, 460
27. 1. 218, 226
Bp. ad Algas., 74, 246
28, 3. 231
11 Damas. Bp, 20. 140, 261
32. 1. 71
145. 166
36. 4, 315
11 Dardan., 287, 355
V, 1. 1. 295
II Evag., 330
2. 3. 240
11 Hedib., 140, 150, 152, 311,
458.
5. 1. 231, 276
462
6. 1. 252
11 Lucin,, 71, 58
14. 2. 249
11 Theodoram, 53
14. 3. 240
Epist. Canon. (Prolog. 7), 290, 311
15, 3, 266
Praef. in Codd. Antiq., 188
21. 1. 235
Jerusalera, Council of, on Canon, 34
John, Acts of (Apocr.), cvi
23. 2, 315
25. 1. 254
11 Gospel of, cviii (see Fourth Gospel),
26. 1. 341
167-195
30, 2. 252
11 m Ephesus, note on, xlv
INDEX.

481

John of Damascus, xxi
Jones on the Canon, cvi n.
Josephus, 94
Judas Iscariot, Gospel of, cii
Judas Thaddaeus, Gospel of, cii
Jude, Bp. of, 331-335; note on, 331
Julius Afric, 137 (see Eus. H. B, I, 7)
Julius Cassianus, 431
Justin Martyr, liii (see Table of Contents)
Apol. I. 4. 114
5. 176
14, 114
15. H5
16, 116, 143, 156
17. 31, 61, 117, 156
19, 156, 225
20, 22, 23, 176
26. 393 et seq.
32. 144, 176, 321
33, 61, 157
34. 157
35. 176, 464
38. 63 n., 471
39. 49, 50. 144
46. 144
48. 464
49. 144
68, 394
60, 226, 275
61, 177
63. 118, 177, 275
66. 60, 62, 177
II. 6. 177
De Eesurrect,, 1. 178
7. 244
9. 178, 245
Dial. 7, 258
10, 60
13. 321
14. 39, 41. 226
17. ii3
20, 198
23, 27, 217
35. 125
47, 51. 126, 217, 267
48. 177
49. 62, 118, 198
62. 63, 177
68. 198
69. 126, 177
76. 119, 157
77. 120 et seq. , 464
78. 158
81. 158, 339
82. 122
84. 158, 248
85, 248
88. 61, 122, 126, 143, 158, 178
93. 123
95. 234
96. 158, 321
99. 123
100. 60, 63, 123, 158, 248
101. 63, 471
102. 124
103. 59, 63, 124, 158

Justin Martyr — continued.
Dial, 104. 61
105, 61, 64, 124, 178
106, 61, 64, 127, 143
107. 64, 124
110. 253
111, 226
113, 321
114. 178
118, 198
122. 124
123, 178
125, 125
138. 250
Exposit. Fid,, 15, 178
Orat, ad Gent,, 5, 234
Juvenal, Sat. viii. 235. 362 n.
Keim, Aus dem Urchr., xxxiv n,, 365 n,
11 Celsus, 369 n,
11 Gesch, Jes,, vi n.
II Jes. V. Naz,, xv, xlv, oix, 170 n.,
364 n,, 369 n.
Kimmel, 33 n.
Kleuker, Ixix n., xcviii n., 456 n.
ICrenkel, xlv
Lactantius, Instit, iv,, 52, 352
Lagarde, 38, 279 n, , 345 n.
Laodicea, Council of, on Canon, 18
Lardner, v n., 42 n,, 44 n., 95 n,, 364 n,,
409, 430 n., 436 n., 456 n,
Lee, Dr E., Ixi n.
Letter of Christians of Vienne and Lyons,
158 and n., iSo (Bus. H. B. V. 1, 2, 3.)
Leucius (Lucius) Charinus, cvii
Lightfoot (Clement, viii, xix n., xxi, 456 n.;
Ignatius, xxvii, xxix; Papias, xii; Silence
of Eiisebius, xliii), 168; Philip., 209;
Gal., 227, 432 n.
Lipsius, xxxvi n., Ixivn., Ixx, 424 n,, 432 n,,
436 n,, 447
Lucian, De Morte Pereg, , lv, 368 ; biogr,
note, 368
Liicke, 319 n., 333 n,, 338 n,
Luke, Gospel of, 154-166
Luke for Lucanus, 164 n,
Luthardt, John, liii, cxi
Lutheran testimony on Canon, 36
Liitzelberger, cix
Manichees, Gospel of, ciii
Mansel's ' Gnosticism,' 384 n,
Marcion, xxxvii, 393-410 ; notes on, 75 and
393 et seq. ; his Gospel examined, 400-
408; Bp,, 408-410; Apostolicon, 409
Marcus, 424 et seq.
Mark, Gospel of, 141-153 ; evidenoe on c. 16.
9-20, 150 et seq.
Martial, lib. x. Epig. 25, 362
Martyrdom of Polycarp, xl
Matthew, Acts of (Apocr,), cvi
Matthew, Gospel of, 114-140
Matthias, Gospel of (Apocr.), cii
Melito, xci, 2 n,, 43 ; orat, to Anton. Caesar,
314

482

INDEX.

Methodius, 351
Meyer on Acts, 163 n.
Migne, ' Diet, des Apocryplies,' xcviii
Mill, N. T., 2n., 297 n.
Mono'imus, 425 n.
Montanists, 434-436
Montanus, biogr. note, 434
Muratorian Canon, xxv, .xliv, Ixxix (see
Table of Contents), 3.-8. 182, 199, 211,
218, 227, 231, 234, 321
Naassenes, 385
Nazarenes, Ixix, 431
New Testament, as a whole, 42-52
Nicephorus on Canon, 29, 455 n,
Nicholson's Gosp. of Hebrews, Ixxvii, 453 u, ,
456 n,, 459 n.
Nicodemus, Gospel of, ci
Nicolas, ' Evangiles Apocryphes,' cv
Niemeyer, 37 n, , 38 n.
Norton, ' Genuineness of the Gospels,' xliii,
Ixi n, , 362 n,
(Ecumenius and Arethas on Apoeal, , 338
Oehler, '0. T. Theol.,' 84 n.
Old Cath. Union on Canon, 32 and n.
Ophites, 385
Origen, Ixxxiii (see Table of Contents)
Canon of, 8 (Bus, H, E. VI. 25), 185, 308
Com. in Mat., 136, 185, 264, 269, 324,
334, 344, 464
Mk,, 148
Com, in John, 83 et seq., 136, 163, 185,
281, 290, 297, 309, 317, 324, 344, 397,
420, 421, 452, 463
Com, in Bp. ad Eom,, 163, 221, 281, 282,
290, 297, 316, 334, 391
Cont. Cels. I. 9, 32, 377
28, 371, 377
38, 58, 62. 372
40, 369
41, 63, 374
50. 375
63. 290
66, 373
67, 70. 376
II. 13, 15, 26. 370
18. 374
24, 45. 373
27. 370, 417
31, 36, 49. 376
32, 48, 59, 63. 375
74. 370
III, 81
20, 211
V. 56. 371
64, 377
VI. 11, 205
12. 377
16. 373
42. 378
VHL 24. 378
De Orat., 136, 281, 290, 323, 471
De Princip, , 2, 309
3. 241, 334
4, 460, 467

Origen — contviiiied.
Dial, de recta fide, 163, 317
Ep. ad Afric, , 205, 280
Hexapl. in Ps. ii. , 205
Hom. on Gen. xiii,, 51 et seq., 163, 308
Hom. on Josh, vii, 52, 163
Levit,, 316
Numb,, 281, 316
Jer. XV., 453, 471 ; xix., 269
Hom. iuLk,, 81, 163 (Eus. H. E, VI. 25),
185, 390, 469
In libr. Jes. Nave, 317
Selecta in Gen. , 185
Exod, , 298, 316
Selecta in Ps. iii. , 290, 309 ; xxx. and
xxxvi., 297
Sum of testimony, 9 n.
Otto's Justin, 364 n,
Overbeck, 365 n,
Pamphilus on Apoeal, , 352
Pantsenus, 133 (Bus, H. E. V. 10 aud Jer,
Vir. Ill, 36), 277
Papias, xii (see Table of Contents), 53-59,
114, 141, 167 (Eus. H. B. III. 39), 338
Parchor, xlvii n.
Paschal controversy, Ixxxv (see Table of
Contents), 189-195; chronicle, xliii n,,
59, 193-195
Passages of unloiown origin, &c., 470 et seq.
Pa,storal Epp., 255 n.
Paul, Epp, of, in general, 209-214
Paul and Thecla, Acts of, cvi, 180, 199, 236
Peratae, 388
Peshito, I, 2 n., 199, 210, 218, 227, 231, 234
Peter and Paul, Acts of (Apocr, ), cvi
Peter, 1 Ep,, 301-311 ; 2 Ep,, 312-318
Peter, Gospel of (Apocr, ), cii
Peter, Preaching of, xiv
Philaret, Cat, of Eastem Ch, on Canon, 34
Philastrius, De Haer,, 399, 438
Philemon, Ep, to, 269-271
Philip, Acts of, cvi
Philip, Gospel of (Apocr.), cii
Philip in Hellas, Acts of, cvi
Philippians, Bp. to, 243-246
Photius Biblioth., 59
Pilate, Acts of (see Acts of Pilate)
Pius IX, , Pope, decree of, ci
Pliny, Bp. to Trajan, xviii, 362
Plumptre, 164 n,, 166 n,
Polycarp, xxxiii (see Table of Contents)
Philipp,, 1. 2. 197
1. 3, 239, 304
2. 1. 244, 304
2, 2. 230, 304
3. 1. 244
3. 2. 233
3, 3, 216, 320
4. 1, 230, 257
5, 1. 234
5, 2, 262
5, 3, 225, 305
6. 1. 216, 230
6, 2, 216
6, 3, 234

INDEX.

483

Vol-ycaicp— continued.
Philipp,, 7, 1. 320, 328
7, 2. 305
8. 1. 305, 321
9, 2, 234, 244, 263
10. 1, 2. 305
11. 2. 225
11. 3, 244, 253
11. 4, 253
12, 1, 239, 275
12, 2, 234
12, 3, 257
Classification of Polycarp's quotations,
xxxix
Polycarp, Martyrdom of—
1. 244
2. 225
7. 113, 197
10. 217
14. 113, 173
20. 217
Classification of quotations in, xl
Polycrates, 183 (Eus, H. E, V, 31)
Porphyry, 378
Possini, Catena Pat, , 129 n.
Prepon, 425
Presbyters, testimony of, cviii n., 71 rf seq.,
218 ; 1 Cor,, 226 (Iraen, adv, H. IV. 27)
Protevan. Jac (see Gospel of James)
' Princeton Eeview,' viii, n,
Pseudo-Origen, 396
Pseudo-Tertullian, 434 n,
Ptolemffius, 422-424 ; Let. to Flora, 423 et

Quadratus on Gospels, 66
11 Proconsul, xxxv
Quartodecimans, xciii n,, xciv, &o.
Eeformed Conf. on Can. , 37 et seq.
E^nan, 'L'Eglise Chrdtienne,' li, 365 n,,
384 n,
Responsiones ascribed to Polycarp, 53 n,
Eeuss, Gesch, xxv, Ixxxiii, Ixxxiv, 32 n, , 40 n, ,
104 n, , 142 n, , 221 n, , 237 n, , 247 n.
Ritschl, 404 et seq.
Roberts's ' Discussions,' Ixx, Ixxi, 456 n.
11 ' Bible of our Lord,' cxv
Roensch, 393 n,
Romans, Bp, to, 215-221
Routh's ' Eel. Sac,' cviii n,, 86, 167, 390
Euinart, xxvii n,
Sanday on Mark, xliv ; on John, cix, cxi,
390 n., 393 n., 401, 407, 418 n.
Saturnilus, 425 n.
Schaflt, 30 n, , 32 n, , 34 n. , 36 n. , 38 n.
Schisms and heresies, predictions of, xv, 125
Schleiermacher, 154 n, , 257 n.
Scrivener, in,, 137 n.
Scythianus, ciii n,
Semler, xcvi, 394 n,
Seneca, Bp. 14. 362 n,
Servianus, 366 n.
Sibylline Oracles, iv n. , xx, Ixxxii
Simon Magus, 383

Simonians, Gospel of, ciii
Sinker, 445 n.
Sirach, vii n.
Smith of Jordanhill, 154 n.
Smith's ' Diet, of Christian Biog.,' 420 n.
Speaker's Commentary, 142 n,, 393 u.
Stanley on Corr., 209 n,
Stieren's 'Irenaeus,' 129 n,, 389 n,
Strauss, cx
Stroth, lv
Suetonius, Claud, and Nero, 364
'Supernatural Eeligion,' xlix n,, Ii, Ixxvii,
lxxviii, 44 n, , 154 n, , 392 n, , 393 n. , 401 ,
403, 414 n,, 422 n,, 456 n,
Symmachus, 432
Syriae Version (see Peshito)
Tacitus, Ann,, xv, 4.}, 361
Tatian, 72 (Eus, H. E, IV. 29) ; 129 (Clem.
Alex, Strom, III,); 162 (Bus, H. E.
IV. 40) ; (Orat. c. Graec), 162, 180, 202
227, 229, 249
Tertullian, biogr, note, 46
Adv. Marc, I. 1, 19. 395
II, 29. 395
III, 14, 343
IV, 1, 49, 410
2. 75, 162, 184, 396
3, 77
4- 78, 397, 408
5, 79, 148, 163, 184, 343
6, 395, 397
19. 402
26, 27, 28, 403
35, 405
39. 406
43. 407 et seq.
V, 1. 408
2, 203, 236
3. 409
9. 134
11, 17. 241
14. 221 n. J
15, 410
21, 260, 268 et seq.
Adv, Prax, 13, 221
15, 50, 323
23, 184
25, 323
27. 308
Adv. Valent. 4. 423
Apologet, 21, 465
31. so
De Bapt. 10. 203
17, 199 n,
De Car, Christi 1. 395
2.3967, 402
20, 22. 134
De Corona 6. 220
De Cult. Pom. 333
De Jejun. 1, 435
10, 203
De Monog, 11. 50
De Orat. 8, 296
20, 308

484

INDEX.

Tertullian — continued.
De Pudicit, 13. 232, 260
20. 278
De Praescr. Hser. x
6, 236, 268
7, 250
22, 203
25. 260, 264
30. 46, 417
32. 46
33, 46, 343
34. 47, 229
36, 37. 47
38. 48 et seq. , 184, 395, 417
De Ees, Carn, 23, 246, 250
24, 252, 254
47, 246
De Virg, Vel, 17, 307
Scorp, 12. 246, 308, 323
13. 220, 254, 264
14. 308
Test, of Twelve Patriarchs, Ixix, 445 et
seq.
Testimonies, oldest, to a collection, 1-17.
Thaddaeus, Acts of (Apocr.), cvi
Theodas CTheododes), xcix
Theodoret (Tatian), H»r. Fab. I. 20, 73
L 24. 399
II, (Eus. H. E, IV, 29), 455, 468
Arg. in Ep. to Heb. , 284 et seq.
Theodoti Epitom. 6, 426
9, 10. 427
12, 14, 19, 22, 44, 49, 86,
86. 428
Theodotus, 426-429, 426 n.
Theophilus of Antioch, 73 and n.
Ad Autolyc, I. 2, 229, 231
7. 231, 240
13. 229
14. 220
II. 2. 246
9, 13. 315
16. 240, 267
17. 245
22, 162, 182, 249
28, 240, 342
III. 4, 231
9, 267
13. 14, 132, 220, 259
Thessalonians, 1 Ep, to, 251, 252
11 2 Bp, to, 253, 254

Thilo's Cod. Apoc, 393 n.
Thomas, Acts of (Apocr.), ci, cvi
11 Gospel of (Apocr.), cvi
Timothy, 1 Ep. to, 255-261
11 2 Ep. to, 262-265
Titus, Bp. to, 266-268
Tischendorf, 2n,, 12 n,, 28 n,, 403; Evang,
Apoc, xcixn,, 156 n,, 174 u,; Nov,
Test., 221 n,
De Evan, Apocr, Orig, , xcvi, cv
Tract. Schab., xvi, 470
Trajan, xxvn., 364
Tregelles, Can. Mur., Ixxxn.
Trent, Council of, on Canon, 30 et seq.
Trullan Council on Canon, 29
Tubingen School, xvii
Twelve Apostles, Gospel of, ciii
Twelve Patriarchs, Testaments of, 445
Uhlhorn, Die Homilien, btii n., lxiv n.,
Ixvi n, , Ixvii
Ur-Evangelium, lv
Usher, xxvii
Valentinian quotation, examples of, 415
et seq.
Valentinus, 413 et seq. and n.
Version, Old Latin, 2, 199, 210, 218, 227,
231, 234
Victorinus Petav. on Apoeal. , 351
Volkmar, Ixivn., Ixxx, 307n. ,393n,, 404,
407,408, 436 n.
Voss, xxvii
Waddington on Polycarp, xxxv
Weiss, 313 n,
Weizsacker, cxiii
Westcott, 28 n., 30 n., 218 n,, 280 n., 323 n,,
333n,,4i8n.,4i9n,
Wieseler's 'Christenverfolgungen,' xxviii,
xxxiv, xxxvi, 113 n., 258 n,, 365 n,
11 Synopsis, Ixxxvi
Wittichen, cixn,, cx, cxi, cxii
Wordsworth on Polycarp, xxxiv
York, Archbishop of, 393 n.
Zahn's ' Ignatius,' xxvii n,, xxix, xxxvi,
368 n,
11 ' Pat, Apost,,' xxvii, xxxiv
Zeller, 154 n.

MESSRS WILLIAM BLACKWOOD & SOWS'
NEW LIST.

PHILOSOPHICAL CLASSICS FOR ENGLISH
READERS. Edited by WILLIAM KNIGHT, LL.D,, Professor of Moral Phil
osophy, University of St Andrews, In crown Svo Volumes, with Portraits.
Vol. I. DESCARTES. By Professor Mahaffy, Dublin. [In a few days.
The following are in preparation : —

Berkeley. By Prof. Praser, Edinburgh.
Butler. By Rev. Canon W. L. Collins.
FiCHTE. By Professor Adamson, Owen's
College, Manchester.
Hume. By the Editor,
Hamilton. By Prof. Veitch, Glasgow.
Hegel. By Prof. Edward Cahd, Glasgow.

Hobbes. By Professor Croom Eobertson,
London,
Kant, By William Wallace, Merton Col
lege, Oxford.
Spinoza. By Dr Martineau, Principal of
Manchester New College,
Vico. By Professor Flint, Edinburgh.

The Series will include Bacon, Looke, Leibnitz, Comte, &c.
The success which attended the experiment of introducing the Greek and Roman
Classics to English Eeaders, induced the Publishers to undertake a similar series, de
voted to Foreign European Classics. In now announcing ths extension of their Scheme
to another Series, dealing with the chief Philosophical writers of modern Europe, from
Descartes and Bacon onwards, the Publishers feel assured that they are filling up a
blank in literature. This day is -Published, the Third Edition of
THEISM. By Robekt Flint, D.D., LL.D., F.R.S.E.,
Professor of Divinity in the University of Edinburgh ; Author of ' The Philosophy of
History in Europe,' &c. Third Edition, Eevised. Crown 8vo, 7s. 6d,
This day is Published, Second Edition,
ANTI THEISTIC THEORIES. By the same Author.
New Edition, revised. Crown 8vo, 10s. 6d.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY IN EUROPE.
By tbe same Author. Vol. I., containing the History of that Philosophy in France
and Germany. Svo, 15s. Vol. II. in preparation.
THE INSTITUTES OF LAW : A Treatise of the Prin-
CIPLES OF Jurisprudence as determined by Nature. By JAMES LORIMER,
Regius Professor of Public Law and of the Law of Nature and Nations in the Univer
sity of Edinburgh. New Edition, revised throughout, and much enlarged. Svo, 18s.
STUDIES IN ROMAN LAW. With Comparative Views
OF THB Laws of France, England, and Scotland. By LORD MACKENZIE,
one ofthe Judges of the Court of Session in Sootiand. Fifth Edition, Eevised. Edited
by John Kirkpatriok, Esq., M,A. Cantab., Dr Jur. Heidelb., LL.B. Edin. Svo,
12s.

WORKS BY PROFESSOR CRAWFORD.
This day is Published, the Third Edition.
THE DOCTEIJSTE OF HOLY SCEIPTURE EESPECTING
THE ATONEMENT. By the late THOMAS J. CEAWPOED, D.D., Pro
fessor of Divinity in the University of Edinburgh. Svo, 12s.
THE FATHEEHOOD OF GOD, Considered in its General
AND Special Aspects, and particularly in relation to the Atonement,
with a Eeview op Recent Speculations on the Subject. Third Edition,
Eevised and Enlarged. Svo, 9s.
THE PEEACHING OF THE CEOSS, and Other Sermons.
Svo, 73. 6d.
MYSTEEIES OF CHEISTIANITY ; Being the Baird Lecture
FOR 1874. Crown Svo, 7s. 6d.
THE LAND OF GILEAD. By Laurence Oliphant,
Author of 'Piccadilly,' &c. In One Vol. Svo, with Illustrations. [/» Noveniber.
AN OLD EDUCATIONAL REFORMER— DR BELL.
By J. M. D. MEIKLBJOHN, M.A., Professor of the Theory, History, and Practice
of Education iu the University of St Andrews. In crown Svo.
Second Edition, Eevised.
A MANUAL OF ENGLISH PROSE LITERATURE,
BIOGRAPHICAL AND CRITICAL : Designed mainly to show Characteristics
OF Style. By W. MINTO, Professor of Logic in the University of Aberdeen. In
crown Svo. , [Immediately.
A HISTORY OF THE REIGN OF QUEEN ANNE.
By JOHN HILL BURTON, D.CL,, Historiographer-Royal for Scotland; Author
of a ' History of Scotland,' &o. In 3 vols. Svo, 36s.
This day is Published.
THE INVASION OF THE CRIMEA : Its Origin,
AND AN Account of its Progress down to the Death op Lord Raglan*
By A. W. KINGLAKE. Vol. VI. "The Winter Troubles." Demy Svo, with
a Map, 16s. This day is Published.
THE ODYSSEY OF HOMER. Books I. -XII. Trans-
lated into Enghsh Verse, with Notes and Parallel Passages. By Sir CHARLES
DU CANE, K,C,M,G, Large Svo, 10s. 6d.

WILLIAM BLACKWOOD &.SONS, Edinburgh and London.

9^62