The testimony rendered to the authenticity of the Gospels by the
heretics who flourished between A.D. 130 and 170 is of importance. At
the beginning of this period, Basilides, the {13} great Gnostic of
Alexandria, who tried to replace Christianity by a semi-Christian
Pantheism, appears to have used Matt., Luke, and John. The fact that
they contain nothing which really supports his peculiar tenets, forms
an argument which shows that the genuineness of these documents was
then too well established for it to be worth his while to dispute it.
Marcion, whose teaching was half Gnostic and half Catholic, endeavoured
to revive what he imagined to be the Christianity of St. Paul, whom he
regarded as the only true apostle. He believed that Judaism was the
work of an inferior god, and he therefore rejected the whole of the Old
Testament, and retained only the Gospel written by St. Luke, the friend
of St. Paul, and ten of St. Paul's Epistles. Modern writers have
sometimes urged that Marcion's list of New Testament books proves that
all other parts of the New Testament were regarded as doubtful about
A.D. 140. But it is quite evident that Marcion, unlike those Gnostics
who adapted uncongenial books to their own systems by means of
allegorical explanations, cut out the books and verses which would not
correspond with his own dogma. In spite of his pretended fidelity to
St. Paul, he mutilated not only St. Luke's Gospel, but even the Epistle
to the Galatians. So whereas it is certain that he used our Luke,
there is no indication to show that he did not admit that the other
Gospels were really the work of the writers whose names they bear.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account