As to the relevancy or irrelevancy of the clause in Matt.xxii.14 I shall say nothing, because it is in either case undoubtedly genuine.

But it is surely a strange paradox to maintain that the words 'Many were created but few shall be saved' are nearer in meaning to 'Many are called but few chosen' than the repetition of those very words themselves.

Our author has forgotten to notice that Barnabas has used the precise word [Greek: klaetoi] just before; indeed it is the very point on which his argument turns, 'because we are called do not let us therefore rest idly upon our oars; Israel was called to great privileges, yet they were abandoned by God as we see them; let us therefore also take heed, for, as it is written, many are called but few chosen.' I confess I find it difficult to conceive anything more relevant, and equally so to see any special relevancy, in the vague general statement 'Many were created but few shall be saved.' But even if it were not so, if it were really a question between similarity of context on the one hand and identity of language on the other, there ought to be no hesitation in declaring that to be the original of the quotation in which the language was identical though the context might be somewhat different.

Any one who has studied patristic quotations will know that context counts for very little indeed.

What could be more to all appearance remote from the context than the quotation in Heb.i.7, 'Who maketh his angels spirits and his ministers a flaming fire'?
where the original is certainly referring to the powers of nature, and means 'who maketh the winds his messengers and a flame of fire his minister;' with the very same sounds we have a complete inversion of the sense.