The Alogi did not reject the first Epistle of St. John: consequently in their time, that is, in the second century, the Epistle did not contain the controverted passage.
The Alogi did not reject the first Epistle of St. John: consequently in their time, that is, in the second century, the Epistle did not contain the controverted passage.
In the second century there arose a sect, to which Epiphanius has given the title of Alogi {1}, because they would not admit the application of the term Logos to Christ. The reason, which they assigned, was, that Cerinthus had applied the term in this manner: whence they argued, that it could not have been thus used by an Apostle. Accordingly, they rejected both St. John's Gospel, and the Apocalypse: and they not only denied, that St. John was the author of these two books, but even ascribed them to Cerinthus. It is evident therefore, that men of this description must have rejected likewise the first Epistle of St. John, if in their time it had contained the controverted passage: for there the term Logos is undoubtedly applied to the second person of the Trinity. If then it can be shown, that the Alogi made no objection to this Epistle, we must conclude, that ch. v. 7. was not contained in the Greek manuscripts, which existed in the second century: for had it been contained in any copies, however few, so remarkable a passage could not have remained unknown to them.
The oldest writer, who has given any account
of these persons, is Philastrius, who expressly declares, that they rejected
St. John's Gospel, and the Apocalypse; but he says nothing of their rejection
of any of his Epistles {1}. The next writer, who has mentioned this sect,
is Epiphanius, who collected, with the utmost zeal, all historical information,
which he could obtain, against the heretics, and has frequently charged
them with more than his information warranted. But in the present instance,
though he has asserted, that the Alogi rejected the Gospel of St. John
and the Apocalypse, and sometimes speaks in indefinite terms of their rejecting
St. John's writings, yet when he mentions St. John's Epistles in particular,
he does not say, that the Alogi rejected these likewise; he hints only
a private suspicion, that they perhaps did so. I will quote the words of
Epiphanius, Haeres. LI. ^3. that the reader may judge for himself.
SCAN ORU . NO. 01. HERE.
Here Epiphanius twice speaks in indefinite
terms of the writings of St. John, as if the Alogi rejected them all: yet,
when he specifies those, which they rejected, he names only the Gospel,
and the Apocalypse, as he does also, Haers. LVI. ^1. where he says, that
the Alogi rejected
SCAN ORU. NO. 02. HERE.
but says nothing of the Epistles. And the following
passage, Haers. LI. ^34. puts the matter out of doubt; where likewise speaking
of the Alogi he says,
SCAN ORU. NO. 03. HERE.
Hence it appears,
1. --- That Epiphanius, by his own confession, means only the Gospel, and the Apocalypse, when he says, that the Alogi rejected the writings of St. John.
2. --- That he is inclined indeed to excite a suspicion, that they rejected perhaps the Epistles also; but that he is not able to bring any evidence in support of this suspicion, or any confession from the Alogi themselves.
Further, Epiphanius, who writes as a man well acquainted with the works of the Alogi, delivers, at full length, their objections to the writings of St. John: but among all these objections, there is not one, which is directed against St. John's Epistles, for they relate entirely to the Gospel and the Apocalypse.
Lastly, the other ecclesiastical writers, who speak of the Alogi, namely, Augustin {3}, John of Damascus {4}, and the anonymous author of the work called, Praedestinatus, sive praedestinatorum haeresis {5}, agree in the assertion, that they rejected St. John's Gospel, and the Apocalypse: but no one of them has asserted, that the Alogi rejected his first Epistle.
The premises therefore, laid down in the title
of this section, being thus established, the inference follows of course.
Footnotes to Section IV.
{1} ---That the Alogi appeared so early as the second century is certain. For Theodorus, whom Epiphanius (Haeres. 54. al. 34) describes as, apospasma ek tes Alogos aireseos, lived in the time of the emperor Severus. See Eusebii. Hist. Eccles. Lib. V. cap. 28. p. 252, 253. ed. Reading.
{2} --- Philastrii Haeres. LX. or (according to some editions), Haeresis, quae sub Apostolis extitit XIII. The superscription is, Haeresis, Evangelium Johannis, et Apocalypsin ipsius rejiciens: and the first words of the text are, Post hos sunt haeretici, qui evangelium secundum Joannem, et Apocalypsin ipsius non recipiunt.
{3} --- Haeres. XXX.
{4} --- Joannis Damasceni Opp. Haeres. LI. p. 88. oi to Evangellion to kata Ioannon athetontes, kai ton Apokalupsin auto, dia to ton elthonta ek to patros Theon logon, onta aei, me dechestai.
{5} --- Bibliotheca Patrum maxima, Tom. XXVII. p. 549. Tricesima haeresis Alogorum sic vocata, quia Verbum Dei esse Filium, accipere nolunt, intantum, ut Evangelium St, Joannis ipsius non esse; nec Apocalypsin accipiunt ejusdem Joannis.
OR