[Footnote 457: Von Engelhardt, Christenthum Justin's, p. 432 f., has pronounced against its genuineness; see also my Texte und Untersuchungen I. 1, 2, p. 158. In favour of its genuineness see Hilgenfeld, Zeitschrift fuer wissenschaftliche Theologie, 1883, p. 26 f. The fragment is worded as follows: [Greek: Plasas ho Theos kat' archas ton anthropon tes gnomes autou ta tes phuseos apeoresen entole mia poiesamenos ten diapeiran. Phulaxanta men gar tauten tes athantou lexeos pepoieken esesthai, parabanta de tes enantias. Outo gegonos ho anthropos kai pros ten parabasin euthus elthon ten phthoran phusikos eisedexato. Phusei de tes phthoras prosgenomenes anankaion en hoti sosai boulomenos en ten phthoropoion ousian aphanisas. Touto de ouk en heteros genesthai, ei meper he kata phusin zoe proseplake to ten phthoran dexameno, aphanizousa men ten phthoran, athanaton de tou loipou to dexamenon diaterousa. Dia touto ton logon edeesen en somati genesthai, hina (tou thanatou) tes kata phusin hemas phthoras eleutherose. Ei gar, hos phate, neumati monon ton thanaton hemon apekolusen, ou prosei men dia ten boulesin ho thanatos, ouden de etton phthartoi palin emen phuiken en heautois ten phthoran peripherontes].] [Footnote 458: Weizsaecker, Jahrbuecher fur deutsche Theologie, 1867, p. 119, has with good reason strongly emphasised this element. See also Staehlin, Justin der Martyrer, 1880, p. 63 f., whose criticism of Von Engelhardt's book contains much that is worthy of note, though it appears to me inappropriate in the main.] [Footnote 459: Loofs continues: "The Apologists, viewing the transference of the concept 'Son' to the preexistent Christ as a matter of course, enabled the Christological problem of the 4th century to be started. They removed the point of departure of the Christological speculation from the historical Christ back into the preexistence and depreciated the importance of Jesus' life as compared with the incarnation. They connected the Christology with the cosmology, but were not able to combine it with the scheme of salvation. Their Logos doctrine is not a 'higher' Christology than the prevailing form; it rather lags behind the genuine Christian estimate of Christ. It is not God who reveals himself in Christ, but the Logos, the depotentiated God, who _as God_ is subordinate to the supreme Deity."] CHAPTER V. THE BEGINNINGS OF AN ECCLESIASTICO-THEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION AND REVISION OF THE RULE OF FAITH IN OPPOSITION TO GNOSTICISM ON THE BASIS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AND THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY OF THE APOLOGISTS: MELITO, IRENAEUS, TERTULLIAN, HIPPOLYTUS, NOVATIAN.[460] 1. _The theological position of Irenaeus and the later contemporary Church teachers_.