_Muratorian Fragment_ p. 33, ed. Tregelles (written about A.D.
170-180).

[91:3] John i. 44, xii. 21 sq.

[91:4] Papias in Euseb. _H.E._ iii. 39; Polycrates in Euseb. _H.E._ iii.
31, v. 24; Caius (Hippolytus?) in Euseb. _H.E._ iii. 30. I have given
reasons for believing that the Philip who lived at Hierapolis was the
Apostle and not the Evangelist in _Colossians_ p. 45 sq.

[91:5] Papias, _l.c._

[92:1] 1 Pet. i. 1.

[92:2] Iren. iii. 3. 4.

[92:3] Iren. ii. 22. 5, iii. 3. 4.

[92:4] _e.g._ Tertull. _de Praescr. Haer._ 32.

[93:1] Ign. _Polyc._ 1-4.

[93:2] _ib._ Sec. 8.

[93:3] Polyc. _Phil._ 13. See below, p. 111 sq.

[93:4] This supposition is quite consistent with his using certain
writings as authoritative. Thus he appeals to the _Oracles of the Lord_
(Sec. 7), and he treats St Paul as incomparably greater than himself or
others like him (Sec. 3).

[94:1] The question of the Jewish or Gentile origin of Clement has been
much disputed. My chief reason for the view adopted in the text is the
fact that he shows not only an extensive knowledge of the Old Testament,
but also an acquaintance with the traditional teaching of the Jews. I
find the name borne by a Jew in a sepulchral inscription (Orell. Inscr.
2899): D.M. CLEMETI. CAESARVM. N.N. SERVO. CASTELLARIO. AQVAE. CLAVDIAE.
FECIT. CLAVDIA. SABBATHIS. ET. SIBI. ET. SVIS. If a conjecture may be
hazarded, I venture to think that our Clement was a freedman or the son
of a freedman in the household of Flavius Clemens, the cousin of
Domitian, whom the Emperor put to death for his profession of
Christianity. It is a curious fact, that Clement of Alexandria bears the
name _T. Flavius Clemens_. He also was probably descended from some
dependent belonging to the household of one or other of the Flavian
princes.

[94:2] Lardner _Credibility_ Pt. ii. c. vi.

[94:3] _Phil._ Sec.10. 'Eleemosyna de morte liberat,' from Tobit iv. 10,
xii. 9.

[95:1] _Phil._ Sec. 12. 'Ut his scripturis dictum est; _Irascimini, et
nolite peccare_, et _Sol non occidat super iracundiam vestram_,'
evidently taken from Ephes. iv. 26.

[95:2] _ib._ Sec. 1. [Greek: hon egeiren ho Theos lusas tas odinas tou
hadou], from Acts ii. 24.

[95:3] [See above, p. 49 sq.]

[95:4] The unrepresented Epistles are Titus and Philemon. The reference
to Colossians is uncertain; and in one or two other cases the
coincidence is not so close as to remove all possibility of doubt.

[96:1] _Phil._ Sec.