Ore&t streiu mutit also be laid on the relation that subsisted between IrenuMia and Polycarj). the disciple of John the Apostle. If the letter to Florinus, recallini; in lifelike forni the a]>pear' ance and ways of I'olycarj>, is genuine, it is quite incn-dible that the Johannine Oo8|>el from which Ircnnus thus quoted lOU times watt not written by the venerated teacher of Poly* carp.
(6) TllEOPHlLUS, Bishop of Antioch, c. A.D. 180, declared in liis tliree Hooks aiidressed to Autolycus, a heatlien, that the same things were advanced by the prophets and evangelists, and he quotes John (i. 13) by name. He is also reported to have written commentaries on the Gospels. On the genuineness of the Lat. transl. of these comm. much controversy has prevailed between Zahn and Harnack ; but there is no nuestion that Tlieophilus was acquainted with St. Joim's writings, and ho designates him as 'spirit-bearing' — occupying the same level with the Law and 'lie Propluts. It is, moreover, far
* ' Reltgioui veneration such as that with which Ircnnus rrpaprled the«c books is of alow growth. They must have held a preat place In the Church aa far back as the memon' of li\iiii.- men extended ' (R. W. Dale, lAving Christ oM i-'our 9o*pfl; p. 146).
from im])robable that he refers to Jn 12^ and 20", for the resemblance to St. John's language ia striking, and we know that he was acquainted with the Gospel.
{<:) Clement of Alexandria was the head of the celebrated Catechetical School from A.D. 189, and was liimself a pupil of Pantaenus and the teacher of Origen, who succeeded him in his office. Irenaeua and Hippolytus probably for a brief period followed his instructions. He was a litterateur, and diligent collector of the opinions and dicta of philosopliers. He held in reverence otlier sacred books, in additiou to the Canonical writings of the NT, such as thr Gospel according to tlie Egyptians, and the Apoc of Peter, a fragment of which has been recently brought to liglit. He was accustomed to cite anc compare the testimonies of ancient writers, as weD as early traditions, concerning the Evangelists and the apostles. It is unfortunate that the most interesting of these are preserved for us only by Eu.sebius{//'£vi. 14, iii.23), but they aver the existence and value of the four Gospels. In the Exiwrtatum (TporpeTTTiKds, § 59) he quotes from one or other of the Gospels between 400 and 500 times, and cites St. John's by name. Eusebius preserves the tradition of Clement, that Peter approved of Mark's narrative, and that ' .Jolin, divinely moved by the Holy Spirit, wrote a .spiritual Gospel on observing that the tilings obvious to the senses had been set forth in earlier Gospels.'
{d) Tertullian, whose literary work was done in Carthage between A.D. 190 and A.D. 230, left abundant testimony to the existence and apos- tolic authority of each of the Gospels. He cites passages from almost every chapter of the Fourth Gospel, and from some chapters almost every verse (see Watkins, Bampton Lectures, p. 24). Hia evidence is of high value, because of the close attention he paid to the text of St. Luke's Gospel, and tlie detailed proof he advanced, verse by verse, that Marcion's ' gospel ' was a mutilated copy of St. Luke. After long and anxious reinvestigation by Baur, Ritschl, V'^olkmar, the author of Sujirm. Heligion, and Sanday, the contention of Tertullian has been sustained ; but it is he also who makes it highly probable that Marcion was acquainted with tlie Fourth Gospel (see Godet's Introd. to Gospel of St. John, vol. i. 221); and without doubt, as in his work (adv. Praxeam, ch. xxiii.) against the monarchianism of Praxeas,TertuIlian submitted to the authority of John the beloved disciple.
No wei-'ht need he laid u|)on the fragments which remain, chielly in Syriac, of the WTitings of Melito of Sardis, or of Claudius ApoUtnaris of Hierapolis, though the list of their works given by Eusebius, and the high value set upon them "by Jerome and Socrates, make it probable that treatises on the Paschal Festival and on the Birth of Christ showed acciuaintance with the Four Gospels.
(e) But a strong link in the chain of proof is found in the writingsofFLAVlus J USTINUS, the philosopher and martyr. Critics dill'er as to the chronology of .Justin's career and the date of Ids martyrdom,* but Hort (t/oi(rn<j/()/" Class, and Sar. Philtil. iii. pp. 155-193), clo.sely approximated bj- Volkmar, thought it safe to say that the chief works of Justin, liis two Apologies and his Dialogue irilh Tn//>ho, must fall between A.D. 145 and 148. Ca-sjiari and Kriiger have ventured on a still earlier date. Justin tells us that, after passing through various stages of philosophic thought, he found the satisfaction of his mind restored by men of prophetic siiirit, who did not demonstrate truth, but, bein^ tilled by the Holy Spirit, speaking things they had seen and heard, gave liiin what he wanteil : ' kindled a llame in his soul, 'and convinced him that 'this philosophy
• Credner placca the liuiita of his activity betwean a.D. ISO-IM Volkmar reduced the limitji between A.D. 140- l&O,
696
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
alone waa profitable and safe.' The torch of Aris- totle and I'lato failed when he became familiar with the Li^rht of Christ. In the first apolo^ he fre<iiiently cites what he styles ' Meiiiunals com- posed by the Apostles and their followers,' In ch. 60 be adds ' which are called Gosprl.f.' but this clause, as o|)ponent8 ur},'e, may be a marjrinal eloss. The term or phrase is slightly varied. Thus he sometimes, as in Ap. i., calls them ' Memoirs of the Aiiostlos,' soiiietimus ' Memoirs' simply, as in the Uuilui/iic ; and when he is referring to an incident mentioned by all four Kvangilists, he introduces it by ' the apostles wrote.' The names of the apostles are not mentioned, yet no phrase could more adequately denote them than ' the apostles and those that followed them.' In addrc.<!-ing the Itoman emperors, or the bigoted Jews of Konie or Asia Minor, the obscure names, Matthew, Maik, Luke, John, would have detracted from, rather than increased, their weight. This is parallel with the reticence of Tertullian, who, when writing his Apology and his address To Che Nations, makes no distinct reference to the 'Gospels' or to their authors. Cyprian, Arnobius, and Lactantiua follow the same rule. In Justin's references to the events of our Lord's life, he introduces a few picturesque details not to be found in the Canonical Gospels, indicating, it may be, some additional sources of information. If he possessed any ' harmony ' of the evangelical narrative, as well as the ' memorials,' it is more likely that it was formed from them, than that it was the parent of them. It is, moreover, simply incredible that, between the date of Justin's writing the Apology or Dialoi/ue and Irenieus' writing his Jtcfuttition, the Four Gospels should have been brought into existence, and utterly displaced Justin's ' memorials,' or that they should have come into such vogue as to be read in churches and be regarded as of primary importance in Lyons and Carthage, Antioch aim Alexandria. Justin refers to some details which are found, so far as we know, in St. Matthew's Gospel only ; he also cites some of the few specialities of St. Mark's Gospel, and at least seven peculiarities to be found in St. Luke's Gospel. The deviation from the strict accuracy of