The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 32

them which o.re in fo.ct microscopic. But the transfusion of 1 John iv. 2, 3 into the follo~ing pnssnge is convincing to many sceptical minds: "For every one who does not conJ'oss that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh i~ antichrist; and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross is of the devil." This becomes more strikin"' from the foot thnt in c. vi. Polyca.rp is referring to the apostles who preached tb; gospel to us. Volkmo.r suggests tho.t Polyco.rp's epistle to the Philippi ans may have been in the bands of the writer of the First EpisUe of John. But it should not be forgotten that Papiaa, a oompanion of Polycarp, mnde use of the First Epistle (according to Eusebius), which remlers it eminently improbable that the Epistle of John was written after the time of Polycnrp ancl Papias. 'fhe superiority and independence of the First Epistle of John aco conspicuous throughout. Polyca.rp's letter shows that it must have been written after Ignatius left him, and before the news of his martyrdom reached him a.t Smyrna. H has been said, if Poly- carp quoted the First Epistle, why should ho not have quoted the Gospel? One might as well ask why he did not, in the short letter, quote 1 Corinthians, or Job, or Jeremiah, or Daniel, or the • Phmclo ' ! The authenticity of Polycarp's letter is placed beyond dispute by Lightfoot (article, Contemporary Review, 1877, and '.Apostolic Fathers,' part ii. vol. i and vol. iii.), and the fact that this letter is interfused and saturated with Pauline thought is in itself a standing contradiction of the theory of the existence of hostile parties within the bosom of the apostolic company. The one ground on which Polycarp's epistle has been questioned is that it sustains the authenticity of the Ignatian letters, which had been referred to a forger of the close of the century ; but if the Igna- tian Epistles are proved to be authentic, the one stumbling-block has been taken away. This Zahn and Lightfoot have done so much to accomplish. (2) CLEMENS RoMANUS AND BARNABAS. It is more than possible that the epistle of Clement of Rome was written before the Fourth Gospel, therefore we do not expect to find traces of the presence of that Gospel in this epistle. The same may possibly be true of the epistle of "Barnabas." The antiquity of the latter has been accepted by some critics because they find in it no trace of the Fourth Gospel Volk.mar, Riggenbach (and cf. Dr. Milligan's 11It; "Barnabas:" 'Dictionary of Christian Biography'). Keim has, however, strongly maintained the presence of the Johannine thonght throughout the epistle, and contends that the root-ideas of the epistle cannot be found eithe!' in the Epistle to the Hebrews or in Paul's Epistles, but only in the Fourth Gospel If so, we are driven back to.the very commencement of the second, or the close of the first, century for such recognition of the Fourth Gospel. Keim thinks there is specific reference to the building of the temple in the reigll of Hadrian, a.bout the year A.D. 120, at latest A.D. 130. If the epistle were genuine, it must have been written as early as between A.D. 70 and 79, as many seem to think, and the presence of what Keim regards as Johannine thought can scarcely have been derived directly from the Gospel. The thoughts may have been conveyed, as they were probably to Paul, by the teaching of John him.self, which, by the study of the Epistles of Paul, can be shown to have been widely diffused in the first century. 'l'homa finds almost every idea of the Fourth Gospel already embodied in the Pauline Epistles (see• Barnabas,' cc. 5. 7. 11. 12). (3) THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS.1 This curious document belongs to the middle of the second century, between A.D. 140 and 150. The enrliest date is thought by Charteris to be .&.D. 13tl, as we find that Christians are being /udicially condemned to the wild beasts. 'fhis- cannot have beeu the case before the reign of Hadrian. There are few, if any, references to the New Testament. Clemens .Alex. and Origen frequently quote it, without regarding it as canouical. The 'Muratorian Fragment' says, "The Pastor was written nuperrime in Rome, by Herma.a, while Bishop Pius, his brother, was in the chair of the Church of the city of Rome." 'l'here are many who believe thnt they trace the presence of the Johannine idea. of the pre-existence of the Son of Goel, the identification of the GATE with the Son of God, and that those who are to be saved must enter by it into the kingdom (' Simi!.,' ix .. 12). Sanday regards this as a very 1 . Hilgenfeld, 'Novum Testamcntum extra C11nonem;' Donaldson, "Apostolic Fathers" !ll 'History of Christi11n Literature and Doctrine;' Keim,' Geschichto Jcsu von Nnzara.' 1,113.  xxxvi INTRODUO'l'ION 'l'O