n, every mark of genuineness in itself.

4. Our author then continues:--

Dallaeus pointed out long ago, that ch. xiii abruptly interrupts
the conclusion of the Epistle.

In what sense this chapter can be said to interrupt the conclusion it is
difficult to say. It occupies exactly the place which would naturally be
assigned to such personal matters; for it follows upon the main purport
of the letter, while it immediately precedes the recommendation of the
bearer and the final salutation. On the same showing the conclusion of
the greater number of St Paul's Epistles is 'abruptly interrupted.'

5. The next argument is of another kind:--

The writer vehemently denounces, as already widely spread, the
Gnostic heresy and other forms of false doctrine which did not
exist until the time of Marcion, to whom and to whose followers he
refers in unmistakable terms. An expression is used in ch. vii in
speaking of these heretics, which Polycarp is reported by Irenaeus
to have actually applied to Marcion in person, during his stay in
Rome about A.D. 160. He is said to have called Marcion 'the
first-born of Satan,' ([Greek: prototokos tou Satana]), and the
same term is employed in this Epistle with regard to every one who
holds such false doctrines. The development of these heresies,
therefore, implies a date for the composition of the Epistle, at
earliest, after the middle of the second century, a date which is
further confirmed by other circumstances.

I will take the latter part of this statement first, correcting however
one or two errors of detail. M. Waddington's investigations, to which I
have already alluded [115:1], oblige us to place Polycarp's visit to
Rome some few years before 160, since his death is fixed at A.D. 155 or
156. Again, Irenaeus does not state that the interview between Polycarp
and Marcion took place at Rome. It may have taken place there, but it
may have occurred at an earlier date in Asia Minor, of which region
Marcion was a native [115:2]. These however are not very important
matters. The point of the indictment lies in the fact that about A.D.
140, earlier or later, Polycarp is reported to have applied the
expression 'first-born of Satan' to Marcion, while in the Epistle,
purporting to have been written many years before, he appears as using
this same expression of other Gnostic teachers. This argument is a good
illustration