Solo

Ephrem is 4th century CE, Stephan. Obviously, you must have been writing this while driving or in an airport lounge.

You are assuming πλῆθος ἐθνῶν = πλήρωμα τῶν ἐθνῶν. But they may be two very different things.

Incidentally, why do you insist that the term 'gnosticism' excludes specifically Judaic esoteric teachings ?

Except for the trifle that Ephrem the Syrian lived two centuries after Valentinus.

Best,
Jiri

andrewcriddle

Try this for Googlebooks USA bridal chamber inscription

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

No you are quite right.

This inscription shows that there were Valentinians in Rome around 150 CE or maybe a little later. But we knew this already.

Andrew Criddle

judge

Uh-huh.

This post should win some kinda prize.

DCHindley

The Source being referenced, The spiritual seed: the church of the "Valentinians" By Einar Thomassen (2006) seems to depend on an article entitled "Inscription" by "Lampe." This appears to be "An Early Christian Inscription in the Musei Capitolini," in: D. Hellholm/H. Moxnes/T. K. Seim, eds., Mighty Minorities?: Minorities in Early Christianity - Positions and Strategies, Festschrift J. Jervell, Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1995, 79-92

A more recent treatment by Lampe is in From Paul to Valentinus: Christians at Rome in the first two centuries (or via: amazon.co.uk) By Peter Lampe, Marshall D. Johnson (2003), the inscription's interpretive history is described starting on page 300. This is part of a chapter "[Are Valentinians] Members of 'Socially Priviliged Classes'[?]"

The Publisher's glowing blurb:

In this pathbreaking study of the rise and shape of the earliest churches in Rome, Lampe integrates history, archaeology, theology, and social analysis. He also takes a close look at inscriptional evidence to complement the reading of the great literary texts: from Paul's Letter to the Romans to the writings of Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, Montanus, and Valentinus. Thoroughly reworked and updated by the author for this English-language edition, this study is a groundbreaking work, broad in scope and closely detailed. In six parts, comprised of fifty-one chapters and four appendices, Lampe greatly advances our knowledge of the shape of leadership and the Christians' relation to the Judeans living in Rome.

A more cautious 2007 Review by "James":

Lampe systematically explores the evidence for Christians and Christianity in Rome from the mid-First century through the end of the Second. Being knowledgeable [myself] of some (but certainly not all) the documents used he generally seems very measured in his conclusions, though I must say I don't find all his arguments fully compelling. It was also a great intro for me to other evidences for the social setting in which the early church lived and witnessed.

FWIW, having read through the Google Books preview of pages 300ff, I'm not sure I like this man's attitude. Very dismissive and critical of those who differ with him.

DCH

MCalavera

Definitely.

And the Earth is flat by the way. There's scientific evidence for that.

stephan huller

I just someone could present an argument as to why the inscription has to be Valentinian as opposed to Jewish-Christian. Again here is the inscription:

And here is what Einar Thomassen (p. 251) says:

I take issue with this claim. If the specific terminology is generic enough then the only limiting the provenance of the inscription is the obviously Christian reference to:

Which appears to me to be closest to John 12.28:

But again there is a fundamental difficulty here which is rarely acknowledged in scholarship. I brought this up earlier but Ephrem is almost all that we have of 'Semitic Christianity.' The fact that the Church Fathers in the late second century mention all these heretics like 'the Valentinians' who use Aramaic-based terminology from the scriptures in no way proves that they were the ones who made these inscriptions. Polycarp and his followers could have just as easily have written this text. There were so-called 'Jewish Christians' in the same period who were very influential who would or could have written something quite similar.

I am not even sure that the Valentinians aren't to be classified as a 'Jewish Christian' sect.

DCHindley

I guess the attempt was made to counter the Christian/Valentinian identification by identifying it as referring to some sort of pagan ritual. This is dismissed because Valentinianism also had a "bridal chamber" rite, and thus is the closer fit.

However, what do we really know of pagan mystery rites? Answer: damn little! It seems to me "the brothers of the bridal chamber" are cult initiates, and obviously "bridal chamber" refers to some mystery of the cult. "My bath" is the likely place where these mysteries are carried out, as it has a spring. "Our halls" refer to the halls of the patron's house, where they eat a sacred meal.

Even "praising the Father and glorifying the Son" may be nothing more than the Patrons of the cult reveling in the praise and glory the initiates bestow upon the patrons (after all, that's why folks patronize private associations in the first place).

So:

To my [one of the patron's personal] bath, the brothers of the bridal chamber [i.e., the cult members] carry the torches [as part of the rite],
[here] in our halls, they hunger for the banquets,
even while praising the Father [this is GENETHS, not PATHR] and glorifying the Son [i.e, praising the patrons, father and son, for their generosity].
There [in my bath] is the only spring and [also] source of truth [in the mystery rite].

Are we to really believe that only Valentinians can have a "bridal chamber" rite as part of their mysteries?

I don't think this is likely.

DCH

stephan huller

When you break it down like that, the material could easily be misinterpreted as denoting something sexual.

stephan huller

Here is Garaducci's reconstruction of the inscription http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journ....2.snyder.html.

It's also reconstructed here http://epigraphy.packhum.org/inscrip...%26region%3D13 as:

Interesting about the γενέτης reference. Here is the LSJ entry:

γενέτ-ης , ου, ὁ,
A. begetter, ancestor, E.Or.1011 (anap.), Call.Epigr. 23.2; father, IG3.1335, 12(7).115 (Amorgos); γενέται καὶ πατρὶς ἔχουσιν ὀστέα, i.e. the tomb of my fathers, BMus.Inscr.2.179,al.: in pl., parents, IG4.682 (Hermione): generally, author, Epigr.Gr.979.4 (Philae).
2. son, “ὁ Διὸς γ.” S.OT472; “ὁ ἐμὸς γ.” E.Ion916 (lyr.).
II. as Adj., = γενέθλιος, θεοί A.Supp.77 (lyr.), E.Ion 1130.
2. produced, “ὁ Νεῖλος θέρει γ.” Olymp.in Mete.94.9.

Snyder notes:

Yet is there any evidence that the Valentinians referred to the Father as γενέτης?

Also I see Snyder remark "One might translate "parent" for γενέτης" before dismissing the suggestion.