however, and he repeats it in numberless instances, is that the Logos submitted to be born, and become man [------], by a Virgin, or he uses variously the expressions: [------].(1) In several places he speaks of him as the first production or offspring [------] of God before all created beings, as, for instance: "The Logos... who is the first offspring of God" [------];(2) and again, "and that this offspring was begotten of the Father absolutely before all creatures the Word was declaring" [------].(3) We need not say more of the expressions: "first-born" [------], "first-begotten" [------], so constantly applied to the Logos by Justin, in agreement with Philo; nor to "only begotten" [------], directly derived from Ps. xxii*. 20 (Ps. xxi. 20, Sept.). It must be apparent to everyone who seriously examines the subject, that Justin's terminology is markedly different from, and in spirit sometimes opposed to, that of the fourth Gospel, and in fact that the peculiarities of the Gospel are not found in Justin's writings at all.(4) On the {296} other hand, his doctrine of the Logos is precisely that of Philo,(1) and of writings long antecedent to the fourth Gospel, and there can be no doubt, we think, that it was derived from them.(2) { 297} We may now proceed to consider other passages adduced by Tischendorf to support his assertion that Justin made use of the fourth Gospel. He says: "Passages of the Johannine Gospel, however, are also not wanting to which passages in Justin refer back. In the Dialogue, ch. 88, he writes of John the Baptist: 'The people believed that he was the Christ, but he cried to them: I am not the Christ, but the voice of a preacher.' This is connected with John i. 20 and 23; for no other Evangelist has reported the first words in the Baptist's reply."(1) Now the passage in Justin, with its context, reads as follows: "For John sat by the Jordan [------] and preached the Baptism of repentance, wearing only a leathern girdle and raiment of camel's hair, and eating nothing but locusts and wild honey; men supposed [------] him to be the Christ, wherefore he himself cried to them: 'I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying: For he shall come [------] who is stronger than I, whose shoes I am not meet [------] to bear.'"(2) Now the only ground upon which this passage can be compared with the fourth Gospel is the reply: "I am not the Christ" [------], which in John i. 20 reads:[------] {298} [------]: and it is perfectly clear that, if the direct negation occurred in any other Gospel, the difference of the whole passage in the Dialogue would prevent even an apologist from advancing any claim to its dependence on that Gospel. In order to appreciate the nature of the two passages, it may be well to collect the nearest parallels in the Gospel, and compare them with Justin's narrative. [------] {299}