We might point out many equally close analogies in {263} the works of Philo,(1) but it is unnecessary to do so, although we may indicate one or two which first present themselves. Philo equally has "the Eternal Logos" [------],(2) whom he represents as the manifestation of God in every way. "The Word is the likeness of God, by whom the universe was created" [------].(3) He is "the vicegerent" [------] of God,(4) "the heavenly incorruptible food of the soul," "the bread [------] from heaven." In one place he says: "and they who inquired what is the food of the soul... learnt at last that it is the Word of God, and the Divine Logos.... This is the heavenly nourishment, and it is mentioned in the holy Scriptures... saying, 'Lo! I rain upon you bread [------] from heaven.' (Exod. xvi. 4.) 'This is the bread [------] which the Lord has given them to eat'" (Exod. xvi. 15).(5) And again: "For the one indeed raises his eyes towards the sky, contemplating the manna, the divine Word, the heavenly incorruptible food of the longing soul."(6) Elsewhere: "... but it is {264} taught by the Hierophant and Prophet Moses, who will say: 'This is the bread [------], the nourishment which God gave to the soul'--that he offered his own Word and his own Logos; for this is bread [------] which he has given us to eat, this is the Word [------]."(1) He also says: "Therefore he exhorts him that can run swiftly to strive with breathless eagerness towards the Divine Word who is above all things, the fountain of Wisdom, in order that by drinking of the stream, instead of death he may for his reward obtain eternal life"(2) It is the Logos who guides us to the Father, God "by the same Logos both creating all things and leading up [------] the perfect man from the things of earth to himself."(3) These are very imperfect examples, but it may be asserted that there is not a representation of the Logos in the fourth Gospel which has not close parallels in the works of Philo. We have given these passages of the pseudo-Ignatian Epistles which are pointed out as indicating acquaintance with the fourth Gospel, in order that the whole case might be stated and appreciated. The analogies are too distant to prove anything, but were they fifty times more close, they could do little or nothing to establish an early origin for the fourth Gospel, and nothing at all to elucidate the question as to its character and authorship.(4) 4 In general the Epistles follow the Synoptic narratives, and not the account of the fourth Gospel. See for instance the reference to the anointing of Jesus, Ad Eph. xvii., cf. Matt. xxvi. 7 ff.; Mark ziy. 3 flf.; cf. John xii. 1 ff. {265}