Author Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1884 Excerpt:...Clement's First Epistle to the Corinthians, and also that he had about that time been brought much in contact with persons and places under the influence of Clement's teaching. There can be little question but that Dr. Westcott, if he believed that Clement was the author of our Epistles, would point to these things and say that Hegesippus borrowed the formula from Clement. He would be false to the principles on which his Synopsis is built up if he did not. We find our Epistles placed in this Synopsis as the first witness to 1 John on the strength of a coincidence of language between 1 John iv. 6 and Ep. ii. 16, which is certainly not more remarkable than the coincidence in the use of the formula in question. The Epistles, however, were not written by Clement in Dr. Westcott's judgment. He wants to place them about the times of Hegesippus, or, at any rate, long before the times of Eusebius. As the author of Supernatural Religion evades the force of the coincidences which are urged in proof of the authenticity of books of the New Testament,--this is the charge which is brought against him,--so Dr. Westcott evades the force of the coincidence to which he appeals. The coincidence which under other circumstances would have proved dependence in this case is purely accidental, and a conspicuous mark of the high antiquity of the Epistles. But has Dr. Westcott never heard of that famous use of Eusebius (to which attention was called on p. 10 sq.), whereby pseudo-Ignatius sought, by the use of the language of Alexander of Jerusalem (as quoted by Eusebius) in his letter to the Church at Antioch, to impose his own letter to the Antiochians upon credulous readers as the veritable work of Ignatius? That noteworthy instance proves that the greatest possible caution is nee...