probably wrote about A.D. 130, and collected his materials many years
earlier, also quoted that Epistle, as we learn from Eusebius. Now, the
connection between the Gospel and the Epistle is, as has been cleverly
remarked, like the connection between a star and its satellite. They
are obviously the work of the same author. If Polycarp, who had
himself seen St. John, knew that the Epistle was genuine, he must have
known that the Gospel was genuine.
The evidence which can definitely be dated between A.D. 120 and A.D.
170 is of extreme interest. It proves conclusively that a belief in
the authenticity of this Gospel was so firmly engrained in the
Christian mind that men holding the most opposite opinions appealed to
its authority. It is true that the "irrational" Alogi rejected it, and
that Marcion repudiated it, not because it was not by an apostle, but
because St. Paul was the only apostle whom he admired. But it was used
by the Catholics, the Gnostics, and the Montanists. St. Justin Martyr
was acquainted with it, and before he wrote, Basilides, the great
Gnostic of Alexandria, borrowed from it some materials for his
doctrine. The equally celebrated Gnostic Valentinus used it, and his
followers also revered it. About A.D. 170 Heracleon, an eminent
Valentinian, wrote a commentary upon this Gospel, of which commentary
some fragments still remain. The Montanists arose in Phrygia about
A.D. 157. Montanus, their founder, endeavoured to revive the power of
prophecy, and his followers maintained that "the Paraclete said more
things in Montanus than Christ {87} uttered in the Gospel." It can
easily be proved that their teaching was an attempt to realize some of
the promises of our Lord contained in St. John's Gospel. And the fact
that the Montanists were strongly opposed to the Gnostics makes it all
the more remarkable that both sects regarded this Gospel as so
important. Somewhat before A.D. 170 St. John's Gospel was inserted by
the great Syrian apologist, Tatian, in his _Diatessaron_, or harmony of
the Gospels, and the apocryphal Acts of John composed near the same
date contain unmistakable allusions to this Gospel.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account