But at last Christ departed from Jesus, and that then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ remained impassible, inasmuch as he was a spiritual being" (1.26.1). How could it be that the Fourth Gospel was at one time in its history regarded as the product of an Egyptian-trained gnostic, and at another time in its history regarded as composed for the very purpose of attacking this same gnostic?Irenaeus stated that the purpose of John at Ephesus was as follows: by the proclamation of the Gospel, to remove that error which by Cerinthus had been disseminated among men, and a long time previously by those termed Nicolaitans, who are an offset of that 'knowledge' [gnosis] falsely so called, that he might confound them, and persuade them that there is but one God, who made all things by His Word; and not, as they allege, that the Creator was one, but the Father and the Lord another; and that the Son of the Creator was, forsooth, one, but the Christ from above another (3.11.1) Helms argues: "So the gospel attributed, late in the second century, to John at Ephesus was viewed as an anti-gnostic, anti-Cerinthean work. It has been recently argued that portions of chaps.
The external evidence fixes the terminus ad quem for the Gospel of John. 180), and Tatian included the Gospel of John in his harmony (c. The Gospel of John is also mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c. Thus one of the basic features of the institution scenes in the synoptics is missing.
Furthermore, there is no account of the baptism of Jesus, and there is confusion about whether or not Jesus practiced baptism (compare and 4:2).
929) Kysar states: "The passages which seem to address the sacraments are sometimes thought to be redactional.
Some maintain that 'water and' in 3:5 and the discourse in -59 are insertions of a later hand by one interested in strengthening the explicit sacramental teachings of the gospel.
Most would argue that the passage attempts to present Christ as the replacement of the Temple that has been destroyed." (p.
918) Note also the irony of : "If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place [i.e.
He admits that many accept that John - 'The Word became flesh' - was 'added by the redactor as an attack on the opponents of I John' (1979, 109) but continues to write as if there were no revision of the Fourth Gospel. Cerinthus was "educated in the wisdom of the Egyptians, taught that the world was not made by a primary God, but by a certain Power far separated from him...
Helms states, "we need to note that part of the purpose of Irenaeus was to attack the teachings of Cerinthus, a gnostic Christian teacher who lived in Ephesus at the end of the first century" (op. Moreover, after [Jesus'] baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles.
temple] and our nation." Finally, there is no mention of the Sadducees, which reflects post-70 Judaism.