that this Epistle was written before our Gospel (a.d. 70-80). In the Epistle of Clement, which doubtless is later than the Gospel (a.d. 95, 96), we have the perplexing phenomena alluded to above.
Mat 5:7, Mat 5:7:1, Mat 5:2. Clem. Rom. Cor. 13:2.Luk 6:36-38.
μακάριοι οἱ ἐλεήμονες, ὅτι αὐτοὶ ἐλεηθήσονται.
μὴ κρίνετε, ἴνα μὴ κριθῆτε· ἐν ᾧ γὰρ κρίματι κρίνετε κριθήσεσθε, καὶ ἐν ᾧ μέτρῳ μετρεῖτε μετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν. οὔτως γὰρ εἶπεν· ἐλεᾶτε, ἵνα ἐλεηθῆτὲ ἀφίετε, ἵνα ἀφεθῇ ὑμῖν· ὡς ποιεῖτε, οὔτω ποιηθήσεται ὑμῖν·
ὡς δίδοτε, οὕτως δοθήσεται ὑμῖν· ὡς κρίνετε, οὔτως κριθήσεσθε· ὡς χρηστεύεσθε, οὕτως χρηστευθήσεται ὑμῖν· ᾧ μέτρῳ μετρεῖτε, ἐν αὐτῷ μετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν. γίνεσθε οἰκτίρμονες καθὼς ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν οἰκτίρμων ἐστίν· καὶ μὴ κρίνετε, καὶ οὐ μὴ κριθῆτε· καὶ μὴ καταδικάζετε, καὶ οὐ μὴ καταδικασθῆτε. ἀπολύετε, καὶ ἀπολυθήσεσθε· δίδοτε, καὶ δοθήσεται ὑμῖν
… ᾧ γὰρ μέτρῳ μετρεῖτε ἀντιμετρηθήσεται [or μετρηθήσεται] ὑμῖν.
This quotation is found in the Epistle of Polycarp (2:3) in this form:
μνημονεύοντες δὲ ὧν εἶπεν ὁ κύριος διδάσκων· μὴ κρίνετε, ἵνα μὴ κριθῆτε· ἀφίετε, καὶ ἀφεθήσται ὑμῖν· ἐλεᾶτε, ἵνα ἐλεηθῆτε· ᾧ μέτρῳ μετρεῖτε, ἀντιμετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν. And Clement of Alexandria (Strom. ii.
18, p. 476, ed. Potter) has it exactly as Clement of Rome, with the exception of ἀντιμετρηθήσεται for μετρηθήσεται: but he is perhaps quoting his
namesake. If not, then the probability that both are quoting a source
different from any of our Gospels becomes much greater (Resch, Agrapha, pp. 96, 97).
Mat 18:6, Mat 18:7, Mat 18:26:24. Clem Rom. Cor. 46:8. Luk 17:1, Luk 17:2, Luk 17:22:2.
ὃς δʼ ἃν σκανο͂αλίσῃ ἔνα τῶν μικρῶν τούτων, τῶν πιστευόντων εἰς ἐμέ, συμφέρει αὐτῷ ἵνα κρεμασθῇ μύλος ὀνικὸς περὶ τ. τράχηλον αὐτοῦ καὶ καταποντισθῇ ἐν τῷ πελάγει τῆς θαλάσσης. οὐαὶ τῷ κόσμῳ. …
οὐαὶ δὲ τῷ ἀνθρώδῳ ἐκείνῳ διʼ οὗ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται·
καλὸν ἧν αὐτῷ εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος. εἶπεν γάρ· οὐαὶ τῷ
ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ· καλὸν ἦν αὐτῷ εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη, ἢ ἕνα τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν μου σκανδαλίσαι· κρεῖττον ἦν αὐτῷ περιτεθῆναι μύλον καὶ
καταποντισθῆναι εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, ἢ ἔνα τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν μου διαστρέψαι.
ἀνένδεκτόν ἐστιν τοῦ τὰ σκάνδαλα μὴ ἐλθεῖν, πλὴν οὐαὶ διʼ οὗ ἔρχεται·
λυσιτελεῖ αὐτῷ εἰ λίθος μυλικὸς περίκειται περὶ τὸν τράχηλον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἔρριπται εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, ἢ ἵνα σκανδαλίσῃ τῶν μικρῶν τούτων ἕνα.
οὐαὶ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ διʼ οὗ παραδίδοται.
Here again Clement of Alexandria (Strom. iii. 18, p. 561) quotes exactly as Clement of Rome, with the exception of μή for οὐκ after εἰ, and the
omission of τήν before θαλάσσαν. In Clem. Rom. Cor. 59:3 we have a composite quotation (Isa 13:11; Psa 33:10; Job 5:11, etc.), which may possibly have been influenced by Luk 1:52, Luk 1:53, Luk 1:14:11, Luk 1:18:14; but nothing can be built on this possibility. We must be content to leave it doubtful whether Clement of Rome knew our Gospel according to Luke; and the same must be said of Polycarp (see above) and of Ignatius. In Eph. 14. we have φανερὸν τὸ δένδρον ἀπὸ τοῦ καρποῦ αὐτοῦ, which recalls ἐκ γὰρ τοῦ καρποῦ τὸ δένδρον γινώκεται (Mat 12:33) and ἕκαστον γὰρ δένδρον ἐκ τοῦ ἰδίου καρποῦ γινώσκεται (Luk 6:44). Smyr. iii. we have the very remarkable passage which perplexed Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome as to its source: ὅτε πρὸς τοὺς περὶ Πέτρον ἦλθεν, ἔφη αὐτοῖς·
Λάβετε, ψηλαφήσατέ με, καὶ ἴδετε ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ δαιμόνιον ἀσώματον. This may be a condensation of Luk 24:36-39, or may come from oral tradition or a lost document. Of other possibilities, τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον (Eph. 16.) recalls Mar 9:43 rather than Luk 3:17: καλοὺς μαθητὰς ἐὰν φιλῇς, χάρις σοι οὐκ ἔστιν (Polyc. 2.) is not very close to Luk 6:32: ἡδοναὶ τοῦ βίου (Rom 7.) is found Luk 8:14, but is a common phrase: and other slight resemblances (e.g. Magn. 10.) may as easily come from other Gospels or from tradition.
We are on surer ground when we come to the Didaché and the Gospel of Peter, the dates of which remain to be determined, but which may be placed between a.d. 75 and 125. In the former we find further evidence of a
combination of passages from Matthew and Luke, of which we have seen traces in Clement of Rome, and which suggests the possibility of a
primitive Harmony of these two documents.
Mat 25:13. Didaché 16:1.Luk 12:35.
γρηγορεῖτε οὖν,
ὅτι οὐκ οἵδατε τὴν ὴμέραν οὐδὲ τὴν ὤραν. γρηγορεῖτε ὑπὲρ τῆς ζωῆς ὑμῶν· οἰ λύχνοι ὑμῶν μὴ σβεσθήσωσαν, καὶ αἰ ὁσφύες ὑμῶν μὴ ἐκλυέσθωσαν, ἀλλὰ γίνσεθε ἔτοιμοι· οὐγὰρ οἵδατε τὴν ὥραν ἐν ᾖ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν ἔρχεται. ἔστωσαν ὑμῶν αἰ ὁσφύες περιεζωσμέναι καὶ οἱ λύχνοι καιόμενοι, καὶ ὑμεῖς ὅμοιοι ἀνθρώποις προσδεχομένοις τὸν κύριον ἐαντῶν.
Here the acquaintance with our Gospel is highly probable, for of the
Evangelists Luke alone has the plural of λύχνος and of ὀσφύς. In giving the substance of the Sermon on the Mount, the Didaché again seems to
compound the two Gospels.
Mt. 7., Mat 7:5. Didaché 1:2-5.Luk 6.
12 πάντα οὖν ὅσα ἐὰν δέλητε ἵνα ποιῶσιν ὺμῖν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς.
44ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν καὶ προσεύχεσθε ὑπὲρ τῶν διωκόντων ὑμᾶς.
46 ἐάν γὰρ ἀγαπήσητε τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας ὑμᾶς, τίνα μισθὸν ἔχετε; … 47 … οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ ἐθνικοὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν;
39 ὅστις σε ῥαοπίζει εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα, στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην. 41 ὅστις σε ἀγγαρεύσει υίλιον ἓν, ὔπαγε μετʼ αὐτοῦ δύο. 40 τῷ θελοντί σοι κριθῆναι καὶ τὸν χιτῶνά σου λαβεῖν, ἀφὲς αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον. 42 τῷ αἰτοῦντί σε δός, καὶ τὸν θέλοντα ἀπὸ σοῦ δανίσασθαι μὴ ἀποστραφῇς. πάντα δὲ ὅσα ἐὰν θελήσῃς μὴ γίνεσθαί σοι, καὶ σὺ ἄλλῳ μὴ ποίει … εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς καταρωμένους ὑμῖν καὶ προσεύχεσθε ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐχθρῶν ὑμῶν, νηστεύετε δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν διωκόντων ὑμᾶς· ποία γὰρ χάρις, ἐὰν ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας ὑμᾶσ; οὐχὶ καὶ τὰ ἔθνη τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν; ὑμεῖς δὲ ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς μισοῦντας ὑμᾶς καὶ οὐχ ἕξετε ἐχθρόν
… ἐάν τις σοι δῷ ῥάπισμα εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα, στρέψ αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην, καὶ ἔσῃ τέλειος· ἐὰν ἀγγαρεύσῃ σέ τις μίλιον ἕν, ὕπαγε μετ αὐτοῦ δύο· ἐὰν ἄρῃ τις τὸ ἱμάτιόν σου, δὸς αὐτῷ καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα· ἐὰν λάβῃ τις ἀπὸ σοῦ τὸ σόν, μὴ ἀπαίτει· οὐδὲ γὰρ δύνασαι. παντὶ τῷ αἰτοῦντί σε δίδου, καὶ μὴ ἀπαίτει. 31καθὼς θέλετε ἵνα ποιῶσιν ὑμῖν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς ὁμοίως.
28εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς καταρωμένους ὑμᾶς, προσεύχεσθε περὶ τῶν ἐπηρεαζόντων ὑμᾶς. 27 ἀλλὰ ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν.
32 καὶ εἰ ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας ὑμᾶς, ποία ὑμῖν χάρις ἐστίν; καὶ γὰρ οἰ ἀμαρτωλοὶ τοὑς ἀγαπῶντας ἀτοὺς ἀγαπῶσιν.
35 πλὴν ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν … καὶ ἔσται ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολύς.
29 τῷ τύπτοντί σε ἐπὶ τὴν σιαγόνα πάρεχε καὶ τὴν ἄλλην,
καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἴροντός σου τὸ ἱμάτιον καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα μὴ κωλύσῃς. 30 παντὶ αἰτοῦτί σε δίδου, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἴροντος τὰ σὰ μὴ ἀπαίτει.
Expressions which are peculiar to each form of the Sermon are here so abundant that we conclude that this doctrine of the Two Ways has been influenced by both forms. But the order in which the several precepts are put together is so different from both Gospels, that the editor can scarcely have had either Gospel before him. Very possibly the order and wording have been disturbed by oral instruction in Christian morality given to
catechumens (Sanday, Bamptons, p. 302). But the evidence of acquaintance with the Third Gospel is strong; and it is somewhat strengthened by the fact that in the Didaché Christ is called the “Servant (παῖς) of God” (9:2, 3, 10:2, 3), a use of παιʼς which in N.T. is almost confined to Luke (Act 3:13, Act 3:26, Act 3:4:27, 30; Comp. 4:25 ; Luk 1:54, Luk 1:69). But this use is common in LXX, and may easily be derived from Isaiah or the Psalms rather than from the Acts. Nevertheless there is other evidence of the influence of the Acts on the Didaché, and scarcely any evidence of the influence of Isaiah or of the Psalms: indeed the references to the O.T. are remarkably few. And this not only makes it quite possible that the use of ὀ παῖς comes from the Acts, but also still further strengthens the conviction
that the Didaché is indebted to the writings of S. Luke. Comp.
συγκοινωνήσεις δὲ πάντα τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου καὶ οὐκ ἐρεῖς ἴδια εἶναι (Did.
4:8) with οὐδὲ εἷς τι τῶν ὑπαρχόντων αὐτῷ ἔλεγεν ἴδιον εἶναι ἀλλʼ ἦν αὐτοῖς πάντα κοινά (Act 4:32). Bryennios and Wünsche see traces of Luk 9:1-l6 and 10:4-21 in Did. 11; but this chapter might easily have stood as it does if Luke had never written. Yet there is enough in what has been quoted above to establish the fact of the influence of Luke on the Didaché.
It is generally admitted that the fragment of the Gospel of Peter suffices to show that the writer of that apocryphal narrative was acquainted with all four of the Canonical Gospels. But it will be worth while to quote some of the expressions and statements which have a marked resemblance to Luke in particular.
Gospel of Peter. Luk 23:24.
4. Πειλᾶτος πέμψας πρὸς Ἡρώδην. 7. Πειλᾶτος … ἀνέπεμψεν αὺτὸν πρὸς Ἡρῴδην.
5. καὶ σάββατον ἐπιφώσκει. 54. καὶ σάββατον έπέφωσκεν.
10. ἤνεγκον δύο κακούργους. 32. ἥγοντο δὲ καὶ ἔτεροι κακοῦργοι δύο.
13. εἷς δέ τις τῶν κακούργων ἐκείνων ώνείδισεν αὐτούς, λέγων· ἡμεῖς διὰ τὰ κακὰ ἃ ἐποιήσαμεν οὕτω πεπόνθαμεν, οὗτος δὲ σωτὴρ γενόμενος τῶν ἀνθρώπων τί ἠδίκησεν ἡμᾶς; 39. εἶς δὲ τῶν κρεμασθέντων κακούρ γων ἐβλασφήμει αὐτόν …
15. ὸ ἥλιος ἔδυ. 45. τοῦ ὴλίου ἐκλείποντος.
28. ὸ λαὸς ἅπας γογύζει καὶ κόπτεται τὰ στήθη. 48. πάντες οἱ συνπαραγενόμενοι ὄχλοι … τύπτοντες τὰ στήθη.
34. πρω̈́ας δὲ ἐπιφώσκοντος τοῦ σαββάτου. 54. καὶ σάββατον ἐπέφεσκεν.
36. δύο ἄνδρας κατελθόντας ὲκεῖθεν πολὺ φέγγος ἔχοντας. 4. ἄνδρες δύο ὲπέστησαν αὐταῖς ἐν ἐσθῆτι ἀστραπτούσῃ.
50. ὄρθρου δὲ τῆς κυριακῆς … ἐπὶ τῷ μνήματι.
54 ἃ φέρομεν εἰς μνημοσύνην αὐτοῦ. 1. τῇ δὲ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων ὄρθρου βαθέως ἐπὶ τὸ μνῆμα ἦλθαν φέρουσαι ἂ ἠτοίμασαν ἀρώματα.
These resemblances, which are too close and too numerous to be accidental, are further emphasized when the parallel narratives are compared. S. Luke alone mentions the sending to Herod. He alone uses the expression
σάββατον ἐπέφωσκεν (contrast Mat 28:1). He alone calls the two robbers κακοῦργοι. He alone tells us that one of the robbers reviled, and that one contrasted the justice of their fate with the innocence of Jesus. He alone mentions the sun in connexion with the darkness. He alone speaks of all the multitudes of spectators, and of their beating their breasts. He alone calls the two Angels at the tomb ἄνδρες (Mt. and Mk. mention only one), and calls the tomb μνῆμα ; and he alone uses φέρειν of the women bringing the spices. There are other passages in which the Gospel of Peter resembles Luke with one or more of the other Gospels ; but what has been quoted above is sufficient to show that the writer of the apocryphal gospel was influenced by S. Luke’s narrative. It must be remembered that these ten coincidences are found within the compass of fifty five verses, and that they are not exhaustive. The inscription on the cross, Θὗτός ἐστιν ὁ βασιλεὺς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ (11), is closer to that given by S. Luke, ὁ β. τῶν Ἰουδαίων οὗτος (23:38), than to any of the other forms; and perhaps the words of the robber, σωτὴρ γενόμενος (see above, 13), are suggested by σῶσον σεαυτὸν καὶ ἡμᾶς (23:39). The use of μεσημβρία for “midday” (15) is found in N.T.
nowhere but Act 22:6. The cry of the Jews Christ’s death, ἴδετε ὅτι πόσον δίκαιός ἐστιν (28), looks like an adaptation of the centurion’s confession, ὄντως ὁ ἄνθρωπος αὖτος δίκαιος ἦν (23:47) ; and perhaps ἐξηγήσαντο πάντα ἅπερ εἶδον (45) is an echo of ἐξηγοῦντο τὰ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ (24:35).
And, as already pointed out (§ 1), Pseudo-Peter always speaks of Jesus Christ as ὁ κύριος, a use which begins to be common in the Third Gospel.
The evidence of another interesting document of about the same date is worth quoting. The Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs is a Greek translation of a Hebrew original. It was gradually Christianized, and reached its present form c. A. D. 70-135. It shows marked traces of a knowledge of the
Synoptic traditions and of S. Luke’s Gospel in particular. Some of the
coincidences given below are probably the result of independent citation of the O.T. But the citation may have been suggested to the later writer by acquaintance with it in the Gospel narrative.
Test. 12 Patr. S. Luke.
οἶνον καὶ σίκερα οὺκ ἔπιον (Reuben 1.). οἶνον καὶ σίκερα οὐ μὴ πίῃ (1:15; Num 6:3).
ἔγνων ὅτι δικαίως πάδξω (Sim. 4.). καὶ ἡμεῖς μὲν δικαίως (23:41).
ἔσεσθε εὺρίσκοντες χάριν ὲνώπιον Θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων (Sim. 5.). Ἰησοῦς προέκοπτεν … κάριτι παρὰ Θεῶς καὶ ὰνθρώποις (2:52; 1Sa 2:26).
ὀ Θεὸς σῶμα λαβὼν καὶ συνεσθίων ὰνθρώποις ἔσωσεν αύτούς (Sim. 6.).
συνεσθίει αύτοῖς (15:2). comp. συνεφάγομεν καὶ συνεπίομεν αύτῳ (Act 10:41).
ἀνεῴχθῃσαν οἱ ούρανοί (Levi 2:18.). ἀνεῳχθῆναι τὸν οὐρανόν (3:21 ; Isa 64:1).
περὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ισραήλ (Ibid.). αύτός ἐστιν ὁ μέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ (24:21).
ἔως ἐπισκέψηται Κύριος πάντα τὰ ἔθνη έν σπλάγχνοις υἰοῦ αὐτοῦ ἕως αἰῶνος (Lev 4.). διὰ σπλάγχνα ὲλέους Θεο͂ ἡμῶν ὲν οἶς έπισκέψεται ἡμᾶς ἀνατολὴ ἐξ ὕψους (1:78).
συνετήρουν τοὺς λόγους τούτους έν τῇ καρδίᾳ μου (Lev 6.) συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα … ὲν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῇς (2:19; comp. 2:51).
καίγε ἔκρυψα τοῦτο ὲν τῇ καρδίᾳ μου, καὶ οὐκ άνήγγειλα αὐτὸ παντὶ ὰνθρώπῳ (Lev 8). καὶ αὐτοὶ ὲσίγησαν καὶ ούδενὶ ὰπήγγειλαν ὲν ὲκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις οὺδὲν ὧν ὲώρακαν (9:36).
δύναμις Υ̓ψίστου (Lev 16). δύναμις Υ̓ψίστου (1:35).
έπέπεσεν ὲπʼ αὐτοὺς τρόμος (Judah 3). φόβος ὲπέπεσεν ὲπʼ αὐτόν (1:12;
comp. Act 19:17).
ποιεῖν πάντ τὰ δικαιώματα Κυρίου καὶ ὑπακούειν ὲντολὰς Θεοῦ (Judah 13). πορεύομενοι ὲν πάσαις ταῖς ὲντολαῖς καὶ δικαιώμασιν τοῦ κυρίου (1:6).
ἀνοιγήσονται ὲπʼ αὐτὸν οὶ οὐρανοί, ἐκχέαι πνεῦμα, εὐλογίαν Πατρὸς ἁγίου (Judah 24). ἀνεῳχθῆναι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ καταβῆναι τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον (3:21, 22).
οἱ ὲν πτωχείᾳ διὰ κύριον πλουτισθήσονται, καὶ οἱ ὲν πενίᾳ
χορτασθήσονται, καὶ οἱ ὲν ἁσθενείᾳ ἰσχύσουσι (Judah 25). μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοί, ὅτι ὐμετέρα ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. μακάριοι οἱ πεινῶντες νῦν, ὅτι χορτασθήσεσθε (6:20, 21; Mat 5:3-6).
ἐπιστρέψει καρδίας ἀπειθεῖς πρὸς Κύριον (Dan 5). ἐπιστρέψαι καρδίας πατέρων ἐπὶ τέκνα· καὶ ἀπειθεῖς ἐν φρονήσει δικαίων (1:17; Mal 4:5).
καὶ ἐὰν ὁμολογήσας μετανοήσῃ ἄφες αὐτῷ (Gad 6.). καὶ ἐὰν μετανοήσῃ, ἄφες αὐτῷ (17:3).
καὶ αὐτὸς ἑλθὼν ὡς ἄνθρωτπος, ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων μετὰ τῶν ἁνθρώπων (Asher 7.). see above, Sim. 6. έλήλυθεν ὀ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἔσθων καὶ πίνων (7:34; Mat 9:19).
Besides these verbal coincidences there are many coincidences in thought, especially respecting the admission of the Gentiles to the Kingdom through the Messiah, who is the Saviour of all, Jew and. Gentile alike. “The Lord shall raise up from Levi a Priest, and from Judah a King, God and man. He shall save all the nations and the race of Israel” (Simeon 7.). “A King shall rise from Judah and shall make a new priesthood … unto all the nations”
(Lev 8). Comp. Judah 24. ; Zebulon 9.; Dan 6.; Naphtali 4., 8. ; Asher 7. ; Benjamin 9. Moreover, there are passages which are very similar in
meaning, although not in wording, to passages in Luke: comp. the end of Joseph 17. with Luk 17:27, and the beginning of Joseph 18. with Luk 6:28.
It is hardly necessary to trace the history of the Third Gospel in detail any further. It has been shown already (pp. 15-17) that Justin Martyr, Tatian, Celsus, the writer of the Clementine Homilies, Basilides, Valentinus, Marcion, and the Churches of Lyons and Vienne, knew the Third Gospel, and that Irenæus, the Muratorian Canon, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and others definitely assign it to S. Luke. In the second half of the second century this Gospel is recognized as authentic and authoritative; and it is impossible to show that it had not been thus recognized at a very much earlier date.
The order of the Gospels has not always been the same. But, just as in the interpretation of the four symbolical creatures, the calf has uniformly been taken as indicating S. Luke, so in the arrangement of the Gospels his has almost invariably been placed third. The order with which we are familiar is the common order in most MSS. and Versions : but in D 594, a b cd e f ff 2 i q r and the Gothic Version, and in the Apostolic Constitutions, what is called the Western order (Matthew, John, Luke, Mark) prevails. The obvious reason for it is to have the two Apostles together and before the other two Evangelists. In a few authorities other arrangements are found. X and the Latin k have John, Luke, Mark, Matthew, while 90 has John, Luke, Matthew, Mark, and 399 John, Luke, Matthew. The Curetonian Syriac has Matthew, Mark, John, Luke.