A commentary on the Epistles of St. John - The Preterist Archive

INTRODUCTION. 7
weight than the probable opposition of the Alogi.
The Marcionites had no writing of St. John in their
canon. It is improbable that Marcion knew none of
St. John's ^yritings. It seems likely that, being an an-
tichiliast, he rejected the Apocalypse. Subsequently,
the gospel too, was suspected by him, and considered
as obnoxious, probably on account of the connection
betwixt Jesus and the Baptist, which it brings out
in strong relief. But, along with the gospel, would
stand or fall the authority and authenticity of the
Catholic epistle. ^8 Altogether, the absence of a book
of the New Testament from the canon of a Gnostic
heretic of the second century, either arising from a
defective knowledge of the entire apostolic literature,
or from some dogmatical prejudice or other, is of far
less critical importance than its existence there
would be.
Accordingly, it is undeniable, that this epistle is
one of those canonical writings which the ecclesias-
tical tradition befriends in a most special manner.
But even if the tradition were less favourable to
it—were the tradition less complete and less unani-
mous than it is— still the genuineness of the epistle
would remain unassailable, until it should have been
entirely established that the Gospel of St. John were
spurious, or the complete harmony in substance,
diction, and language, betwixt the epistle and the
gospel should have ceased to be manifest. The
^^ '' Neanders genet. Entwickelung der vornehmsten gnost.
Systeme," {i. e. Genetic development of the principal Gnostic
Systems,) p. 309—311.