(2) We possess only a Lat. tr. of the liecognitionet of ths Pseudo-Cleme-nt, made by Kufinus. The Homilies are probably the more ancient work, and are extant in Greek. 'The date at which this Ebionite work was produced cannot be finally determined, but the best judgment throws it into the middle of the second century. Hilgenfeld in 1850 declined to see any quotation from the Fourth Gospel. Lagarde. however, giv<i« Ifi supposed references to it. Thus, Horn. iii. 62, 'The tnj*
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
701
Prophet hath 9Wom "I am the pate (ctXtj) of life," whoso en^ercth by me, eut«reth into tlie life' ; and a^'ain, 'My sheep hear my voice ' (cf. Jn 10» und '•^). In ISom, xi. 20, * Except ye be born a^jain of or in living water (Ciotri JwfT*) unto the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit, ye shall not ent«r into the kingdom of the heavens' (of. Jn 3^). In 1863 Dressel discovered the xixtb Uoinily, where, in ch. 22, occura an almost verbal quotation of Jn 9*- 3. Ililt'i^nfeUI yielded to this evidence, which makes Baur's date lor the Gospel finally incredible. There is, doubtless, little o^eement between the spirit and teaching of the (Jospel and the Olementinetf, which makes the •vidunce etill more remarkable.
(3) MoNTAXUB and Montanism also sufTer as evidence by the uncertainty as to their date. The diBproi>ortionate space piven to this theme in Eusebius, UE v., does not clearly fasten the rise of this Phrygian heresy to a distinct period, though giving the names and a sketch of the writers, Miltiades, ApoUonius, etc., who contended with it in the reicn of Commodus, 180 ff. Some have fixed on 140— Oieseler on I6U — others 157, others ISO. Salmon looks to the 3rd cent, for the origin of Che heresy. If the earlier date shoiild be finally established, the evidence becomes clear that John's Gospel must have been taken as a record of the valedictory discourse, for Montantia chose there- from the term ParacletuSy 'the other Comforter,' as referring to DO other than to himself \ actually claiming that our Lord p-ophesied bis (Montanus*) appearance in the fulness of time. Theodoret also says that Montanus made a similar use of the terms \9y«( and 'SvfA'^m.
(4) Makcion admittedly makes no reference or allusion to the Fourth Compel, but TertuUian {adv. Mare. iv. 3) shows that Marcion uses Gal 2 to justify his rejection of gospels supposed to be apostolic, becjiuse they were apostolic, not be<^ause they were not so. Tertullian (</« Canie Chrijiti^ ch. iii.), while argu- ing against the h^-l)e^spi ritual ism of Marcion, says, 'If thou h^st not rejected the writings opposed to thy system, the Gospel of John would be there to convince thee.' Surely the Fourth Gospel is more explicit than are the Synoptics in asserting the full humanity of the Lord Jesus. Marcion reached Rome in a.d. 140, and we are thus allowed to assume an earlier and wide diffusion of the various gospels which he rejected and nmtilated to servo the purposes of his own system of philosophy.
(.'>) Valentintts, the poet- philosopher of Gnostic theosophy, with his disciiiles Ptolemmus and Herocleon, Theodotus and Marcus, formeu an important school of thought, pervading the 2ud cent. He appeared in Uome between a.d. 135-100, having been before this m Alexandria, and is said to have died in Cyprus A.D. 160. TertuUian tells us that he made use of the whole of the \iutrtiT>-*ntum, i.e. books of NT {de Praescr. Ucer. 38). Irenwus, about a.d. 182, wrote his great work (adc. liter.) in
Kart to meet and refute the eclectic errors of Volentinus and is school. Hippolj-tus wrote his Rf/utation of ail Ueresiet in the same sjiirit, and they both auote from the master and his disciples, not always accurately discriminating them. Now, as we have seen (cf. p. 01)7'), Heracleon [s:iid by Clem. Alex, to have been well known to Valentinus] comjx>8ed a comm. upon considerable portions of John's Gospel, extracts from which are preserved by Origen. These passages show that a disciple of Valentinus treated the Fourth Gospel as of divine authority. Ptolemmus also, in a letter of his o^ldreased to Flora and pre- served by Epiphaniufl {ado. Uobt. xxxiii. 8-7X quotes Jn l*-* and Jn 1237. Indeed, Irenmus positively assures us that Valen- tinus and his disciples 'abundantly make use of the Gospel'; and Hippolytus confirms this by a pcr\'erted use of Jn lo**, which he attributes to Valentinus himself, — with the fonnula ^W rather than (?«#'», — and cites also, as from Valentinus, the Johan- nine phrase, 'the Prince of this world,' 6^2. Uut the entire system of 'yEons,' and their 'Syzygies' or couples, which make up the (hjdoad and the Pleroina, is marked by the use of
such terms as n«Tr/>, \iyo<, ♦w, Zm*., 'A>.nf««, Mo*vyttr.(,
n«^«A*iT4>c, with others; it is clear that this cannot be acci* dental : either * John * built upon Valentinus, or Valentinus, find- ing these terms in a book believed to be of sacred authority, utilizer) them for his own purposes. Putting the simple, natural, and religious use of these terms In the prologue of the Gospel and elsewhere, over against the highly technical ond theosophical use of them in the system of Valentinus, it becomes clear that the heresiareh himself was familiar with the Fourth Gospel. In tliis conclusion. HIeok, Keim, Bunsen agree, as against Pavidson and Sup. lifl. Thoma (p. H22) admits that the (lependi'nce of the Valentinian sc^hool upon the Gospel is not chronologically or dogmatically impossible, though in- Asmonstrable.