Steven Carr

That is a) much later and b) not true apparently. Pliny asks for advice about what to do, which presumes that he does not know that being a Christian means being killed. It was being in a political association that was dangerous. Pliny could not care less about any belief in a resurrection.

Perhaps this is why the Christian apologist, Origen, writing in Contra Cells Book 3 Chapter 8, said that there had been very few Christian martyrs.
"For in order to remind others, that by seeing a few engaged in a struggle for their religion, they also might be better fitted to despise death, some, on special occasions, and these individuals who can be easily numbered, have endured death for the sake of Christianity, --God not permitting the whole nation to be exterminated, but desiring that it should continue, and that the whole world should be filled with this salutary and religious doctrine."


This was in the 240s AD. Even after two centuries of "persecution", Origen could still say that Christian martyrs were "easily numbered".

How can this be if being a Christian was a capital crime in itself?

Hardly peripheral. If you cannot say when , where or how something happened, that lessens its evidential value.


Just a few lines before, Clement wrote that Joseph had been persecuted "even unto death". As Clement can hardly mean that Joseph died a martyr's death, the phrase "even unto death" does not mean that Peter and Paul died a martyr's death. In fact, Peter and Paul are mentioned in the context of such figures as Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and David, none of whom were martyred.

Do you believe that Clement was saying that Joseph was martyred, when ge wrote 'Jealousy caused Joseph to be persecuted even unto death, and to come even unto bondage.?'

As it happens Clement was talking about the jealousy of fellows, so he may be implying that the jealousy and envy Peter and Paul faced (the jealousy that persecuted them to death like it did Jospeh), was the jealousy of fellow Christians.

spin

Just a brief explanation regarding my previous post, responding specifically to:

My post should indicate that Paul had met Cephas, but that Cephas is not Peter and that Peter is mentioned in Galatians 2 in an interpolation.


spin

andrewcriddle

Trajan's reply to Pliny makes it clear that execution for being a Christian is legitimate. The issue is that until the 3rd century the Roman government usually (with some ugly exceptions) operated a 'Don't ask Don't tell' policy.

In order to be convicted of Christianirty under normal practice before the 3rd century the following had to occur.
Either one openly told the authorities that you were a Christian and challenged them to make an issue of it (Usually the authorities took you up on it).
Or some private citizen brought a formal claim against you of being a Christian, knowing that if you denied this on questioning the accuser would risk heavy penalties for libel no matter how strong the evidence that your denial of Christianity was 'economical with the truth'.


Paul's execution is IMO almost certain the parallelism between the accounts of Peter and Paul make it likely that Clement means that both suffered similar fates.

It is I suppose possible that Clement was misinformed or that his account was misinterpreted by later readers to generate the story of Peter's martyrdom, but neither is IMO very probable.

Andrew Criddle

Steven Carr

Andrew quite ignores my questions, so I shall repeat them, giving him a chance to ignore them in public once more :-

Just a few lines before, Clement wrote that Joseph had been persecuted "even unto death". As Clement can hardly mean that Joseph died a martyr's death, the phrase "even unto death" does not mean that Peter and Paul died a martyr's death. In fact, Peter and Paul are mentioned in the context of such figures as Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and David, none of whom were martyred.

Do you believe that Clement was saying that Joseph was martyred, when ge wrote 'Jealousy caused Joseph to be persecuted even unto death, and to come even unto bondage.?'

The New Testament has Christians being allowed to live , even though the authorities knew perfectly well that they were Christians.

The Christian, Melito - the Bishop of Sardis, also wrote about persecution, in a letter to the Roman Emperor. He reminds the Emperor that Christianity started in the reign of Augustus and in all the time since, only under Nero (64 AD) and Domitian (95 AD), have Christians been systematically persecuted.

"For, what never before happened, the race of the pious is now suffering persecution, being driven about in Asia by new decrees. For the shameless informers and coveters of the property of others, taking occasion from the decrees, openly carry on robbery night and day, despoiling those who are guilty of no wrong. ... if he guards the philosophy which grew up with the empire and which came into existence with Augustus; that philosophy which thy ancestors also honoured along with the other religions.

And a most convincing proof that our doctrine flourished for the good of an empire happily begun, is this--that there has no evil happened since Augustus' reign, but that, on the contrary, all things have been splendid and glorious, in accordance with the prayers of all. Nero and Domitian, alone, persuaded by certain calumniators, have wished to slander our doctrine, and from them it has come to pass that the falsehood has been handed down, in consequence of an unreasonable practice which prevails of bringing slanderous accusations against the Christians.'


'Splendid and glorious' hardly describes a policy of killing Christians njust for being Christians.

And Paul's matrydom is hardly certain.

Perhaps you can produce the proof of Paul's martrydom.

And how any possible martydom of Paul can help Victor in his original claim that an Argument from Martydom rebuts the charge that the disciples stole the body is beyond me.

andrewcriddle

The passage in Clement begins with a list of Old Testament figures who suffered but were not killed.

It ends with praise of a 'vast multitude' who are almost cetainly described as being executed by the authorities. (I'm not sure what else 'were persecuted as Danaids and Dircae' can mean other than some form of death in the arena)

Hence to resolve the ambiguity as to what is meant about Peter we must turn to the parallel passsage about Paul. If Paul was martyred then the passage is certainly referring to this and 'given his testimony' would mean 'given his testimony by his death'. The same would almost certainly be true of the statement that Peter 'having given his testimony went to his appointed place of glory'.

If 2nd Timothy was written by Paul then it makes his martyrdom pretty obvious. If not then it is most unlikely that it was written after 110 CE (Polycarp appears to know the Pastorals) and it presupposes an accepted tradition of Paul's martyrdom.

Hence Paul's martyrdom is almost certain hence in the passage about Paul Clement is alluding to Paul's martyrdom hence in the closely parallel passage about Peter he is alluding to Peter's martyrdom.

Melito, writing to Marcus Aurelius is exaggerating a little. There was clearly some persecution of Christians under Trajan see Pliny/Trajan correspondence and Letters of Ignatius. (Ignatius's death was just possibly after Trajan but certainly long before Marcus Aurelius.) There had been other martyrdoms since eg Telesphorus bishop of Rome around 140. The execution of Polycarp and others probably occurred in the last years of Antoninus Pius although some would place it in the time of Marcus Aurelius.

There was correspondence between the Emperor Hadrian and the proconsuls of Asia upholding the prosecution of Christians but requiring strict safeguards.

It seems clear that death was for Christianity (or at least 'atheism' the refusal to worship Caesar and/or the traditional Roman Gods), rather than for normal criminal charges.

But as I said before with strict safeguards the fact that Christianity technically carried the death penalty did not put ordinary Christians at much risk. It was only when official policies encouraged private delation in this matter rather than discouraging it, that the typical Christian was likely to face trial.

Note the reference to the evils wrought by informers in the passage from Melito. Roman criminal law had almost no police in our sense. Prosecution generally depended upon accusation by private citizens. The effect of something being illegal depended upon whether officialdom encouraged or discouraged informers.

Marcus Aurelius saw Christians as an anti-social threat and encouraged their prosecution, but he did not make Christianity illegal that had been true in theory and sometimes in practice for a long time.

When exactly it became true is less clear certainly by the time of Trajan, Nero may have set the precedent but the clear legal position probably developed later

Andrew Criddle

Steven Carr

Victor Reppert wrote about his paper , on 6th March 2004, 'I never said I knew how the Apostles died.......'

How anybody can use an argument from non-existent facts is beyond me.....

Surely it is an Argument from Rumoured Martydoms :-)

Steven Carr

So the phrase 'persecuted even unto death' does not mean killed?

There is no doubt that Peter and Paul were dead by 95 AD.

What Christian doubted that they had gone to their appointed place of glory?

Would any Christian have thought that Peter and Paul would not have a place of glory , even if they had died normal deaths?

After all, the NT says that the disciples expected a place of glory in the Kingdom.

Surely Clement is saying no more than that Peter and Paul were steadfast their whole life long.

spin

I don't think any scholar treats 2Timothy as Pauline.

Polycarp lived until the 160s, so 2Tim could have been written any time during the 2nd century.


spin

andrewcriddle

In context it refers to intention to murder rather than murder.
Joseph was thrown into a pit with the intention of killing him.

His brothers later change their minds and sell him into slavery instead, as the passage from Clement goes on to refer to.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

Most scholars date the Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians within a year or so of the death of Ignatius of Antioch (see chapter 13).

Almost all scholars date the death of Ignatius to the reign of Trajan ie 117 at the latest.

(FWIW recent work on the Martyrdom of Polycarp suggests a date in the late 150's rather than the mid 160's as used to be thought)

Andrew Criddle