There is naturally a certain hesitation in using evidence for the Epistle as available also for the Gospel, but I have little doubt that it may justly so be used and with no real diminution of its force.  The chance that the Epistle had a separate author is too small to be practically worth considering.

This then will apply to the case of Papias, of whose relations to the fourth Gospel we have no record, but of whom Eusebius expressly says, that ‘he made use of testimonies from the first Epistle of John.’  There is the less reason to doubt this statement, as in every instance in which a similar assertion of Eusebius can be verified it is found to hold good.  It is much more probable that he would overlook real analogies than be led astray by merely imaginary ones—­which is rather a modern form of error.  In textual matters the ancients were not apt to go wrong through over-subtlety, and Eusebius himself does not, I believe, deserve the charge of ‘inaccuracy and haste’ that is made against him [Endnote 278:1].

* * * * *

In regard to the much disputed question of the use of the fourth Gospel by Justin, those who maintain the affirmative have again emphatic support from Dr. Keim [Endnote 278:2].  We will examine some of the instances which are adduced on this side.

And first, in his account of John the Baptist, Justin has two particulars which are found in the fourth Gospel and in no other.  That Gospel alone makes the Baptist himself declare, ’I am not the Christ;’ and it alone puts into his mouth the application of the prophecy of Isaiah, ’I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness.’  Justin combines these two sayings, treating them as an answer made by John to some who supposed that he was the Christ.

Justin, Dial. c. 88.

To whom he himself also cried:  ’I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying [Greek:  ouk eimi o Christos, alla phonae boontos]; for there shall come one stronger than I,’ &c.

John i. 19, 20, 23.

And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?  And he confessed, and denied not:  but confessed, I am not the Christ [Greek:  oti ouk eimi ego o Christos]...  I am the voice of one crying [Greek:  ego phonae boontos] in the wilderness,’ &c.

The passage in Justin does not profess to be a direct quotation; it is merely a historical reproduction, and, as such, it has quite as much accuracy as we should expect to find.  The circumstantial coincidences are too close to be the result of accident.  And Dr. Keim is doubtless right in ridiculing Volkmar’s notion that Justin has merely developed Acts xiii. 25, which contains neither of the two phrases ([Greek:  ho Christos, phonae boontos]) in question.  To refer the passage to an unknown source such as the Gospel according to the Hebrews—­all we know of which shows its affinities to have been rather on the side of the Synoptics—­when we have a known source in the fourth Gospel ready to hand, is quite unreasonable [Endnote 280:1].