{356}
by country or language or by their customs, for they have neither cities nor speech of their own, nor do they lead a singular life. They dwell in their native countries, but only as sojourners [------], and the writer proceeds by a long sequence of ant.i.thetical sentences to depict their habits. "Every foreign land is as their native country, yet the land of their birth is a foreign land" [------], and so on. Now this epistle is in great part a mere plagiarism of the Pauline and other canonical epistles, whilst professing to describe the actual life of Christians, and the fifth and sixth chapters, particularly, are based upon the epistles of Paul and notably the 2nd Epistle to the Corinthians, from which even the ant.i.thetical style is derived. We may give a specimen of this in referring to the context of the pa.s.sage before us, and it is important that we should do so. After a few sentences like the above the fifth chapter continues: "They are in the flesh, but do not live according to the flesh. They continue on earth, but are citizens of heaven "[------].(1)
It is very evident here, and throughout the Epistle, that the Epistles of Paul chiefly, together with the other canonical Epistles, are the sources of the writer"s inspiration. The next chapter (vi) begins and proceeds as follows: "To say all in a word: what the soul is in the body, that Christians are in the world. The soul is dispersed throughout all the members of the body, and Christians throughout all the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body but is not of the body, and Christians dwell in the world, but are not of the world. [------]. The invisible soul is kept in the visible body, and Christians are known, indeed, to be in the world, but their worship of G.o.d remains invisible.
The flesh hates the soul and wages war against it, although in no way wronged by it, because it is restrained from indulgence in sensual pleasures, and the world hates Christians,
{358}
although in no way wronged by them, because they are opposed to sensual pleasures [------]. The soul loves the flesh that hates it, and the members, and Christians love those who hate them "[------]. And so on with three or four similar sentences, one of which, at least, is taken from the Epistle to the Corinthians,(1) to the end of the chapter.
Now the pa.s.sages pointed out as references to the fourth Gospel, it will be remembered, distinctly differ from the parallels in the Gospel, and it seems to us clear that they arise naturally out of the ant.i.thetical manner which the writer adopts from the Epistles of Paul, and are based upon pa.s.sages in those Epistles closely allied to them in sense and also in language. The simile in connection with which the words occur is commenced at the beginning of the preceding chapter, where Christians are represented as living as strangers even in their native land, and the very essence of the pa.s.sage in dispute is given in the two sentences: "They are in the flesh, but do not live according to the flesh" [------], which is based upon 2 Cor. x. 3, "For we walk in the flesh, but do not war(2) according to the flesh" [------], and similar pa.s.sages abound; as for instance, Rom. viii. 4... "in us who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit; 9. But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit [------]: 12...
So then, brethren, we are debtors not to the flesh, that we should live after the flesh" [------] &c., &c. (Cf. 4, 14.). And the second: "They continue on earth but are citizens of heaven" [------], which recall Philip, iii. 20: "For our country (our citizenship) is in heaven"
[------].(3) The sense of the pa.s.sage is everywhere found, and nothing is more natural than
{359}
the use of the words arising both out of the previous reference to the position of Christians as mere sojourners in the world, and as the ant.i.thesis to the preceding part of the sentence: "The soul dwells in the body, but is not of the body," and: "Christians dwell in the world but are not of the world." Cf. 1 Cor. ii. 12; vii. 31; 2 Cor. L 12. Gal.
iv. 29, v. 16 ff. 24, 25, vi. 14. Rom. viii. 3 ff. Ephes. ii. 2, 3, 11 ff. Coloss. iii. 2 ff: t.i.tus ii. 12. James i. 27. There is one point, however, which we think shows that the words were not derived from the fourth Gospel. The parallel with the Epistle can only be made by taking a few words out of xvii. 11 and adding to them a few words in verse 14, where they stand in the following connection "And the world hated them, because they are not of the world" [------]. In the Epistle, in a pa.s.sage quoted above, we have: "The flesh hates the soul, and wages war against it, although unjustly, because it is restrained from indulgence in sensual pleasures, and the world hates Christians, _although in no way wronged by them, because they are opposed to sensual pleasures_."
[------].Now nothing could more clearly show that these a.n.a.logies are mere accidental coincidence, and not derived from the fourth Gospel, than this pa.s.sage. If the writer had really had the pa.s.sage in the Gospel in his mind, it is impossible that he could in this manner have completely broken it up and changed its whole context and language. The phrase: "they are not of the world" would have been introduced here as the reason for the hatred, instead of being used with quite different context elsewhere in the pa.s.sage. In fact, in the only place in which the words would have presented a true parallel with the Gospel, they are not used. Not the slightest reference is made throughout the Epistle to Diognetus to any of the discourses of Jesus. On the other hand, we have seen that the whole of the pa.s.sage in the Epistle in which these sentences occur is based both in matter, and in its peculiar ant.i.thetical form, upon the Epistles of Paul, and in these and other canonical Epistles again, we find the source of the sentence just quoted: Gal. iv. 29. "But as then, he that was born after the flesh
{360}
persecuted him (that was born) after the Spirit, even so it is now."(1) v. 16. "Walk by the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the l.u.s.t of the flesh. 17. For the flesh l.u.s.teth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh: for these are contrary the one to the other, that ye may not do the things that ye would."(2) There are innumerable pa.s.sages in the Pauline Epistles to the same effect.
We pa.s.s on now to the next pa.s.sage in the order of the Epistle. It is not mentioned at all by Tischendorf: Dr. West-cott introduces it with the words: "G.o.d"s will is mercy," by which we presume that he means to paraphrase the context "He sent his Son as wishing to save [------]....
and not to condemn."(3) This sentence, however, which is given as quotation without any explanation, is purely a composition by Canon Westcott himself out of different materials which he finds in the Epistle, and is not a quotation at all. The actual pa.s.sage in the Epistle, with its immediate context, is as follows: "This (Messenger--the Truth, the holy Word) he sent to them; now, was it, as one of men might reason, for tyranny and to cause fear and consternation? Not so, but in clemency and gentleness, as a King sending his Son [------] a king, he sent [------]; as G.o.d he sent (him); as towards men he sent; as saving he sent[------] (him); as persuading [------],
not forcing, for violence has no place with G.o.d. He sent as inviting, not vindictively pursuing; he sent as loving, not condemning [------].
For he will send him to judge, and who shall abide his presence?"(4) The supposed parallel in the Gospel is as follows (John iii. 17): "For G.o.d sent not his Son into the world that he might condemn the
{361}
world, but that the world through him might be saved"(1) [------].
Now, it is obvious at a glance that the pa.s.sage in the Epistle is completely different from that in the Gospel in every material point of construction and language, and the only similarity consists in the idea that G.o.d"s intention in sending his Son was to save and not to condemn, and it is important to notice that the letter does not, either here or elsewhere, refer to the condition attached to salvation so clearly enunciated in the preceding verse: "That whosoever believeth in him might not perish." The doctrine enunciated in this pa.s.sage is the fundamental principle of much of the New Testament, and it is expressed with more especial clearness and force, and close a.n.a.logy with the language of the letter, in the Epistles of Paul, to which the letter more particularly leads us, as well as in other canonical Epistles, and in these we find a.n.a.logies with the context quoted above, which confirm our belief that they, and not the Gospel, are the source of the pa.s.sage--Rom. v. 8: "But G.o.d proveth his own love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. 9. Much more then.......
shall we be saved [------] through him from the wrath (to come)."" Cf.
16,17. Rom. viii. 1: "There is, therefore, now no condemnation [------]
to them which are in Christ Jesus.(2) 3.... G.o.d sending his own Son"
[------] &c. And coming to the very 2nd Epistle to the Corinthians, from which we find the writer borrowing wholesale, we meet with the different members of the pa.s.sage we have quoted: v. 19.... "G.o.d was reconciling the world unto himself in Christ, not reckoning unto them their trespa.s.ses..... 20. On Christ"s behalf, then, we are amba.s.sadors, as though G.o.d were entreating by us; we pray on Christ"s behalf: Be reconciled to G.o.d. v. 10. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, &c. 11. Knowing, then, the fear of
{362}
the Lord, we persuade [------] men," &c. Galatians iv. 4: "But when the fulness of time came, G.o.d sent out his Son [------], 5. That he might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons,"(1) &c. Ephes. ii. 4. "But G.o.d being rich in mercy because of his great love wherewith he loved us, 5. Even when we were dead in our trespa.s.ses, quickened us together with Christ--by grace ye have been saved"--cf. verses 7,8. 1 Thess. v. 9. "For G.o.d appointed us not to wrath, but to the obtaining salvation [------] through our Lord Jesus Christ." 1 Tim. i. 15. "This is a faithful saying.... that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" [------]. 1 Tim. ii. 3. "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of G.o.d our Saviour [------]. 4. Who willeth all men to be saved "[------]. Cf. v. 5, 6. 2 Tim. i. 9. "Who saved us [------], and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose, and the grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began; 10. But hath been made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour [------] Jesus Christ"3 These pa.s.sages might be indefinitely multiplied; and they contain the sense of the pa.s.sage, and in many cases the language, more closely than the fourth Gospel, with which the construction and form of the sentence has no a.n.a.logy. Now, with regard to the Logos doctrine of the Epistle to
{363}
Diognetus, to which we may appropriately here refer, although we must deal with it in the briefest manner possible, so far is it from connecting the Epistle with the fourth Gospel, that it much more proves the writer"s ignorance of that Gospel. The peculiar terminology of the prologue to the Gospel is nowhere found in the Epistle, and we have already seen that the term Logos was applied to Jesus in works of the New Testament, acknowledged by all to have been written long before the fourth Gospel. Indeed, it is quite certain, not only historically, but also from the abrupt enunciation of the doctrine in the prologue, that the theory of the Logos was well known and already applied to Jesus before the Gospel was composed. The author knew that his statement would be understood without explanation. Although the writer of the Epistle makes use of the designation "Logos," he shows his Greek culture by giving the precedence to the term Truth or Reason. It has indeed been remarked(1) that the name Jesus or Christ does not occur anywhere in the Epistle. By way of showing the manner in which "the Word" is spoken of, we will give the entire pa.s.sage, part of which is quoted above; the first and only one in the first ten chapters in which the term is used: "For, as I said, this was not an earthly invention which was delivered to them (Christians), neither is it a mortal system which they deem it right to maintain so carefully; nor is an administration of human mysteries entrusted to them, but the Almighty and invisible G.o.d himself, the Creator of all things [------] has implanted in men, and established in their hearts from heaven, the Truth and the Word, the holy and incomprehensible [------], not as one might suppose, sending to men some servant or angel or ruler [------], or one of those ordering earthly affairs, or one of those entrusted with the government of heavenly things, but the artificer and creator of the universe [------] himself, by whom he created the heavens [------];(3) by
{364}
whom he confined the sea within its own bounds; whose commands [------]
all the stars [------]--elements) faithfully observe; from whom (the sun) has received the measure of the daily course to observe; whom the moon obeys, being bidden to shine at night; whom the stars obey, following in the course of the moon; by whom all things have been arranged and limited and subjected, the heavens and the things in the heavens, the earth and the things in the earth, the sea and the things in the sea [------], fire, air, abyss, the things in the heights, the things in the depths, the things in the s.p.a.ce between. This (Messenger--the truth, the Word) he sent to them. Now, was it, as one of men might reason, for tyranny and to cause fear and consternation? Not so, but in clemency and gentleness, as a King sending his Son, a king, he sent; as G.o.d he sent (him); as towards men he sent, as saving he sent (him); as persuading," &c., &c.(1) The description here given, how G.o.d in fact by Reason or Wisdom created the Universe, has much closer a.n.a.logy with earlier representations of the doctrine than with that in the fourth Gospel, and if the writer does also represent the Reason in a hypostatic form, it is by no means with the concreteness of the Gospel doctrine of the Logos, with which linguistically, moreover, as we have observed, it has no similarity. There can be no doubt that his Christology presents differences from that of the fourth Gospel.(2)
We have already seen how Jesus is called the Word in works of the New Testament earlier than the fourth Gospel,(3) and how the doctrine is constantly referred to in the Pauline Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews, and it is to these, and not to the fourth Gospel, that the account in the Epistle to Diognetus may be more properly traced. Heb. L 2. "The Son of G.o.d by whom also he made the worlds. 10. The heavens are works of thy hands" [------]. xi. 3. "By faith we understand that the worlds were framed [------], by the word of G.o.d" [------]. 1 Cor. viii.
6. "Jesus Christ by whom are all things" [------]. Coloss. i. 13. "...
The
{365}
Son of his love: 15. Who is the image of the invisible G.o.d [------] the first-born of all creation; 16. Because in him were all things created, the things in the heavens, and the things in the earth, the things visible and the things invisible [------] whether they be thrones or dominions, or princ.i.p.alities, or powers; All things have been created by him and for him [------]. 17. And he is before all things, and in him all things subsist. 18. And he is the head of the body, the Church, who is the Beginning(1) [------]; the first-born from the dead; that in all things he might be the first. 19. Because he was well pleased that in him should all the fulness dwell. 20. And through him to reconcile all things unto himself," &c., &c. These pa.s.sages might be greatly multiplied, but it is unnecessary, for the matter of the letter is substantially here. As to the t.i.tles of King and G.o.d they are everywhere to be found. In the Apocalypse, the Lamb whose name is "The Word of G.o.d"
[------], (xix. 18) has also his name written (xix. 16), "King of kings and Lord of lords" [------].(2) We have already quoted the views of Philo regarding the Logos, which also merit comparison with the pa.s.sage of the Epistle, but we cannot repeat them here.
The last pa.s.sage to which we have to refer is the following: "For G.o.d loved men, for whose sakes He made the world, to whom He subjected all things that are in the earth... Unto whom [------] He sent his only-begotten Son, to whom He promised the kingdom in heaven [------]
and will give it to those who love Him."(3) The context is as follows: "For G.o.d loved men [------] for whose sake he made the world, to whom he subjected all things that are in it, to whom he gave reason and intelligence, to whom alone he granted the right of looking towards him, whom he formed after his own image, to whom he sent his only begotten son [------], to whom he has promised the kingdom in heaven, and will give it to those who have loved him. And when you know this, with what
{366}
gladness, think you, you will be filled? Or how will you love him, who beforehand so loved you? [------]. But if you love, you will be an _imitator of his kindness_," &c. [------].(1) This is claimed as a reference to John iii. 16 f. "For G.o.d so loved the world [------] that he gave his only begotten son [------] that whosoever believeth in him might not perish," &c. 17. "For G.o.d sent not his son into the world that he might judge the world," &c. [------]. Here, again, a sentence is patched together by taking fragments from the beginning and middle of a pa.s.sage, and finding in them a superficial resemblance to words in the Gospel. We find parallels for the pa.s.sage, however, in the Epistles from which the unknown writer obviously derives so much of his matter. Rom.
v. 8: "But G.o.d giveth proof of his love towards us, in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. 10.... through the death of his son." Chap. viii. 8, "G.o.d sending his son, &c. 29.... Them he also foreordained to bear the likeness of the image of his son, &c. 32. He that spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all," &c. 39.
(Nothing can separate us) "from the love of G.o.d which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Gal. ii. 20.... "by the faith of the Son of G.o.d who loved me and gave himself for me." Chap. iv. 4. "G.o.d sent out his son [------]
.... that he might redeem," &c. Ephes. ii. 4. "But G.o.d being rich in mercy because of his great love wherewith he loved us. 5. Even when we were dead in our trespa.s.ses hath quickened us together with Christ. 7.
That he might show forth the exceeding riches of his grace in kindness [------] towards us in Christ Jesus." Chap. iv. 32. "Be ye kind [------]
one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, even as G.o.d also in Christ forgave you."* Chap. v. 1. "Beye therefore imitators [------]
of G.o.d as beloved children. 2. And walk
{367}
in love [------] even as Christ also loved you [------], and gave himself for us," &c., &c. t.i.tus iii. 4. "But when the kindness [------]
and love towards men [------] of our Saviour G.o.d was manifested. 5...
according to his mercy he saved us.... 6.... through Jesus Christ our Saviour. 7. That being justified by his grace, we should become heirs according to the hope of Eternal life."
The words: "Or how will you love him who so beforehand loved you?"
[------], Canon Westcott refers to 1 John iv. 19, "We love G.o.d(2) because he first loved us" [------]. The linguistic differences, however, and specially the subst.i.tution of [------], distinctly oppose the claim. The words are a perfectly natural comment upon the words in Ephesians, from which it is obvious the writer derived other parts of the sentence, as the striking word "kindness" [------], which is commonly used in the Pauline Epistles, but nowhere else in the New Testament,(3) shows.
Dr. Westcott "cannot call to mind, a parallel to the phrase "the kingdom in heaven""(4) which occurs above in the phrase "to whom he has promised the kingdom in heaven, and will give it to those who have loved him" [------]. This also we find in the Epistles to which the writer exclusively refers in this letter: James il 5, "heirs of the kingdom which he promised to them that love him" [------] i. 12. "... he shall receive the crown of life which he promised to them that love him"
[------]. In 2 Tim. iv. 18, we have: "The Lord... shall preserve me safe unto his heavenly kingdom" [------](5)
The very fact that there is no exact parallel to the phrase "kingdom in heaven" in our Gospels is unfavourable to the argument that they were used by the author. Whatever evangelical works he may have read,
{368}
it is indisputable that the writer of this Epistle does not quote any of them, and he uses no expressions and no terminology which warrants the inference that he must have been acquainted with the fourth Gospel.
As we have already stated, the writer of the Epistle to Diognetus is unknown; Diognetus, the friend to whom it is addressed, is equally unknown; the letter is neither mentioned nor quoted by any of the Fathers, nor by any ancient writer, and there is no external evidence as to the date of the composition. It existed only in one codex, destroyed at Strasburg during the Franco-German war, the handwriting of which was referred to the thirteenth or fourteenth century, but it is far from certain that it was so old. The last two chapters are a falsification by a later writer than the author of the first ten. There is no internal evidence whatever in this brief didactic composition requiring or even suggesting its a.s.signment to the second or third centuries, but on the contrary, we venture to a.s.sert that there is evidence, both internal and external, justifying the belief that it was written at a comparatively recent date. Apart from the uncertainty of date, however, there is no allusion in it to any Gospel. Even if there were, the testimony of a letter by an unknown writer at an unknown period could not have any weight, but under the actual circ.u.mstances the Epistle to Diognetus furnishes absolutely no testimony at all for the apostolical origin and historical character of the fourth Gospel.(1)
The fulness with which we have discussed the supposed testimony of Basilides(2) renders it unnecessary for us to re-enter at any length into the argument as to his knowledge of the fourth Gospel.
Tischendorf(3) and