The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 37

the 'R~futation of all Heresies,' now generally attributed to him, has given much tdditional information. It is Rdmitted that. onr knowledge of Valentinus and of his disciples comes to us Recond hand, but we find a decisive proof that Irenrous wrote his work against heresies not later than A.D. 182, perhaps earlier, and this by a number of coincident references.I lrenams describes the writing and system of Valentinus and his two followers Ptolemieus and Heracleon, who are generally mentioned together. Now, Irenmus say~ "that the Valentinians (' Adv. Hier.,' iii. 11. 7) avail themselves in the most complete 1anner of the Gospel according to John to demonstrate their syzygies (pair of reons)." renams also asserts that they made use of the Scriptures, twisting them to their owu purpos~ (iii. 12. _12). In numerous pass~"llll they are shown to have quoted tho synopt1sts, and (1. 8. 5) he quot.es at length numerous passages from eh. i. 1-18 which were t:.rtured to sustain their peculiar system of emanation, with other references t~ their similar use of Paul's Epistles to theColoSS1aos, Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians. Moreover, Tertullian (whose evidence Dav_idson puts on one side, because, says he, "that father knew very little about Valentmus ") says that Valentinus made use of "the whole instrument "-the entire collection of sacred books(' De Prros. Hieret.,' c. 38). We have already seen above that Irenrous does mention Ptolemmus and Heracleon by name, as two of these disciples of Valentinus, aod there can be no reasonable doubt that, in his extant writings, the former quotes the synoptic Gospels fully and repeatedly. Epiphanius has preserved an epistle of Ptolemams to Flora (Epiphanius, • Hmr.,' xxxiii.), in which Matt. xii 25; xix. 6, 8; xv. 5-8; v. 17, 38, 39, are undoubtedly irubedded, revealing intimate acquaint.a.nee with peculiar characteristic phraseology of the First Gospel Moreover, in the same letter occurs an unmistakable quotation from eh. i. 3. Clemens of Alex. (' Strom.,' iv. 9) declares that Heracleon was personally known to Valentinus himself (-yva,plµ.os), which would throw bis date back to at least A..D. 160; for Valentinus came to Rome to proclaim his peculiar philosophy about A.D. 140,and he died in Cyprns, A..D.160; i.e. Eusebius says, Valentinus came to Romo in the time of Hyginus, between A,D. 136 and 140. Now, this fellow-disciple with Ptolemmus, viz. Heracleon, actually wrote a commentary upon John's Gospel, from which Origen makes large quotations. So that we are thrown back to the date of A.D. 160-170, and possibly earlier, when a heretic treats the Fourth Gospel with so much respect as to regard it as of high Christian authority. Notwithstanding this evidence, Dr. Davidson does not allow that Valentinus himself made use of the Gospel, and suggests that it may have been produced a little before Heracleon's time, and that he found it useful for his specific pnrpose. Here, however, as if to refute the speculation, we find, in the' Refutation of all Heresies,' by Hippolytus (vi. 35 [30, Eng. trans.J), ".A.ll the prophet.a, therefore., and the Law spoke by means of (lur&) the demiurge, a foolish god, he says (referring to Valentious himself). On this account (tf,711Tl), he says, saith the Saviour, • All that came before me were thieves and robbers."' A similar method is adopted by Hippolytus (viii. 10) in quoting, on the authority of Valentious, John iii. 5, 6. So also (ix. 12), eh. xiv. 11; and the phrase, 6 upxfi1v 'Toii icolTp.oii .,-06.,-ou in vi. 52. 'l'here is, perhaps, a little vagueness as to whether Hippolytus, in the sixth book, is referring to Valentinus or to his followers; but when Valentinus's whole system bristles with references to A&-yos, na:.,-~p, +fi1s, Z"'1/, 'AA116•la:, Mo110-yl111Js, Da:pa:icll.Tl'ros, as elements in his philosophic system, we a.re convinced of one or two things-either that the Fourth Gospel was based on Valentinus, or that the latter ma.de use of this Scripture, as of the rest in defence of his system. Putting the simple, natural, biblical use of these terms ~ John's prologue and elsewhere against the artificial cumbrous use of them in Valentinus, with all the other evidence of the high value put upon the Gospel at this time, it becomes as nearly cert.a.in a.s is possible in such regioilll th~t Va.lentinus himself was familiar with the Fourth Gospel. This, then, throws the existence of the Gospel back to the very beginning of the second century. In this conclusion both Bleek and Keim, as well a.a Bunsen, agree. 1 The death of Eleutberns, in .LD. 190, after the appearance of Theodotioo's translation of the Old Testament, which we are told by Epiphanius came out io the reign of Commodns (A.D, 180-190), and which iB dated in the 'Paschal Chron.' A,D. 184, during the oonsulate of Marcellllll and <Elian, ia one of the oota.  '!'HE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN. x1i