Supernatural Religion, Vol. 2 (of 3) / An Inquiry into the Reality of Divine Revelation

nfirmation of the conclusion, otherwise arrived at, that he did not, and could not, know the Gospel and also ascribe it to him.

ert that this description applies to the long and artificial discourses of the fourth Gospel, whilst, on the other hand, it eminently describes t

intance with the fourth Gospel, the writings of Justin not only do not furnish the slightes

has recorded, any evidence for our Gospels. Apologists generally admit that this source, at least, is barren of all testimony for the fourth Gospel, but Canon Westcott cannot renounce

ve either a resurrection, or that he shall come to render to every one according to his works. As many as believed, however, did so, through James." The rulers fearing that the people would cause a tumult, from considering Jesus to be the Messiah [---], entreat James to persuade them concerning Jesus, and prevent their being deceived by him; and in order that he may be heard by the multitude, they place James upon a wing of the temple, and cry to him: "O just man, wh

thers. The Jews were well acquainted with a similar use of the word in the Old Testament, in some of the Messianic Psalms, as for instance: Ps. cxviii. 19, 20 (cxvii. 19, 20 Sept.). 19," Open to me the gates [---] of righteousness; entering into them, I will give praise to the Lord;" 20, "This is the gate [---] of the Lord, the righteous shall enter into it"(2) Quoting this passage, Clement of Alexandria remarks: "But explaining the saying of the prophet, Barnabas adds: Many gates [---] being open, th

en the two ways."(2) The Epistle, under the symbol of the two ways, classifies the whole of the moral law.(3) In the Clementine Homilies, xviii. 17, there is a version of the saying, Matt. vii. 13f, derived from another source, in which "way" is more decidedly even than in our first Synoptic made the equivalent of "gate:" "Enter ye through th

would have been right in making [---], doctrine, teaching, the equivalent of [---], although he a

"What is the door of Jesus?" but they desire James to declare plainly to the people, what is the teaching of Jesus, and his personal pretension. To suppose that the rulers of the Jews set James upon a wing of the temple, in order that they might ask him a question, for the

optics, and need not add more here. It is certain that had he said anything interesting about our G

of Hierapolis.(2) It is perfectly clear that the wo

at Papias did not

which he mentions,

reports regarding

d in deprecati

d as Apostolic compositions, or authoritative documents. Had he said anything regarding the composition or authorship of the fourth Gospel, Eusebius would certainly have mentioned the fact, and this silence of Papias is strong presumptive evidence against the Johannine Gospel.(1) Tischendorfs argument in regard to the Phrygian Bishop is mainly directed to this point, and he maintains that the silence of Eusebius does not make Papias a witness against the fourth Gospel, and does not

essed the high value he attached to tradition, and his eagerness in seeking information from the Presbyters. The statements regarding the Gospels composed by Matthew and Mark, quoted by Eusebius, are illustrative at once both of the information collected by Papias and of that cited by Eusebius. How comes it, then, that nothing whatever is said about the fourth Gospel, a work so peculiar and of such exceptional importance, said to be composed by the Apostle whom Jesus loved? Is it possible to suppose that when Papias

not find anything regarding the fourth Gospel in the work of Papias, and that Papias was not acquainted with it. This presumption is confirmed by the circumstance that when Eusebius write

of that of Peter."(l) On the supposed identity of the authorship of the Epistle and Gospel, Tischendorf, as in the case of Polycarp, claims this as evidence for the fourth Gospel. Eusebius, however, does not quote the passages upon which he bases this statement, and knowing his inaccuracy and the hasty and uncritical manner in which

e Epistle would scarcely affect the question as to

of John was published and given to the churches by John whilst he was still in the flesh, as Papias, named of Hierapolis, an esteemed disciple of John, related in his 'Exoterics' that is his last five books." Tischendorf says: "There can, therefore, be no more decided declaration made of the testimony of Papias for the Johannine Gospel."(1) He wishes to end the quotation here, and only refers to the continuation, which he is obliged to admit to be untenable, in a note. The passage proceeds: "Disscripsit vero evange

book at all. This extraordinary piece of evidence is so obviously absurd that it is passed over in silence by other critics, even of

say they, the Lord declared: In my Father's house are many mansions(1) (John xiv. 2). As the Presbyters set this declaration in connection with the blessedness of the righteous in the City of God, in Paradise, in Heaven, according as they bear thirty, sixty, or one hundred-fold fruit, nothing is more probable than that Iren?u

the Presbyters of Papias, and, as he does not give the original, he should at least have indicated that

ng on the abundance of the blessings in the Millennial kingdom, he affirms that Creation will be renovated, and the Earth acquire wonderful fertility, and he adds: § 3, "As the Presbyters who saw John the disciple of the Lord, remember that they heard from him, how the Lord taught concerning those times and said:" &c. ("Quemadmodum pres-byteri meminerunt, qui Joannem discipulum Domini viderunt, audisse se ab eo, quemadmodum de te

continuing his argument. It is clear that Iren?us introduces the quotation from Papias, and ending his reference at: "They who shall come to them shall see," he continues, with a quotation from Isaiah, his own train of reasoning. We give this passage to show the manner in which Iren?us proceeds. He then continues with the same subject, quoting (v. 34,35) Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, the Apocalypse, and sayings found in the New Testament bearing upon the Millennium. In c. 35 he argues that the prophecies he quotes of Isaiah, Jeremiah

erved the Greek of

n to contradict the

earer and contempor

at Papias in his p

s that

ll enjoy the delights of Paradise, and others shall possess the glory of the City; for everywhere the Saviour shall be seen as those who see him shall be worthy. § 2. But that there is this distinction of dwelling [---] of those bearing fruit the hundred fold, and of the (bearers) of the sixty fold, and of the (bearers of) the thirty fold: of whom some indeed sh

to banquet at the Wedding. The Presbyters disciples of the Apostles state that this is the

we are considering must have been taken from a book referred to three chapters earlier, and was not introduced by Iren?us from some other source. In the passage from the commencement of the second paragraph Iren?us enlarges upon, and ill

ely after which phrase, introduced by Iren?us himself, he says: "The Presbyters, the disciples of the apostles, state that this is the order and arrangement of those who are saved," &c. Now, if the preceding passages had been a mere quotation from the Presbyters of Papias, such a remark would have been out of place and useless, but being the exposition of the prevailing vi

s who saw John the disciple of the Lord," three chapters before, Iren?us distinctly states that Papias testifies what he quotes in writing in the fourth of his books, but there is nothing whatever to indica

supports his extraordinary statement that the public career of Jesus, instead of being limited to a single year, extended over a period of twenty years, and that he was nearly fifty when he suffered,(3) by the appeal: "As the gospel and all the Presbyters testify, who in Asia met with John the disciple of the Lord (stating) that these things were transmitted to them by John. For he continued among them till the times of Trajan."(4) Tha

ad seen the Apostles, and from those who learnt from them."(3) &c. Further on, speaking evidently of a different person, he says: "In this manner also a Presbyter disciple of the Apostles, reasoned regarding the two Testaments:"(4) and quotes fully. In another place Iren?us, after quoting Gen. ii. 8, "And God planted a Paradise eastward in Eden," &c., states: "Wherefore the Presbyters who are disciples of the Apostles [---], say that th

(Sectator et discipulus apostolorum)(2), and characterizes Mark as "the interpreter and follower of Peter" (interpres et sectator Petri)(3), and refers to both as having learnt from the words of the Apostles.(4) Here is, therefore, a wide choice of Pres

ent the term Presby

iarchs and Prophe

2; Mark v

the Presbyters

outh, Reliq. Sac

apologetic, seriously cites it amongst the external testimonies for the early existence of the Gospel, and the few who do refer to the passage merely mention, in order to abandon, it.(2) So far as the question as to whether the fourth Gospel was mentio

h it. Being, therefore, so completely detached from Papias, it is obvious that the passage does not in any way assist the fourth Gospel, but becomes as

in his esteem, if indeed it did not materially contribute to the formation of his views, which is still more probable. Apologists admit the genuineness of this statement, nay, claim it as undoubted evidence of the acquaintance of Papias with the Apocalypse.(2) Canon Westcott, for instance, says: "He maintained, moreover,

the Apostolic origin

el were long advanced with hesitation, and were generally felt to be inconclusive, but on the discovery of the concluding portion of the work and its publication by Dressel in 1853, it was found to contain a passage which apologists now claim as decisive evidence of the use of the Gospel, and which even succeeded in converting some independent critics.(2) Tis

-

rgument. In Matt. vii. 13, 14, we have the direct description of the gate [---] which leads to life [---], and we have elsewhere quoted the Messianic Psalm cxviii. 19, 20: "This is the gate of the Lord [---],(2) the righteous shall enter into it." In another place, the author of the Homilies, referring to a passage parallel to, but differing from, Matt. xxiii. 2, which we have elsewhere considered,(3) and which is derived from a Gospel differe

postles, once being put into the mouth of Peter applied to Jesus,(2) and the second time also applied to him, being quoted by Stephen.(3) It is quite clear that the writer is quoting from uncanonical sources, and here is another express declaration regarding himself: "I am he," &c., which is quite in the spirit of the preceding passage which we are discussing, and probably derived from the same source. In another place we find the following argument

" &c., so here again they make him adopt this saying of Moses and, "being the true prophet," declare: "I am the gate or the way of life,"-inculcating the same commandments of the law which the Gospel of the Homilies represents Jesus as coming to confirm and not to abolish. The whole system of doctrine of the Clementines, as we shall presently see, indicated here even by the definition of "the true prophet," is so fundamentally opposed to that of the fourth Gospel that there is no reasonable ground for supposing that the au

Gospel of the Clementines puts into the mouth of Jesus, John v. 46: "For had ye believed Moses ye would believe me, for he wrote of me." Whilst th

rom the Johannine Gospel occurs in the sa

pression than: hearing his voice. This brief anonymous saying was in all probability derived from the same source as the preceding,(2) which cannot be identified wit

in,(3) and may therefore pass on to the last and most important passage, to which we have r