jakejonesiv

Philemon

Philemon is counted as one of the seven authentic Pauline epistles.

Pliny wrote to Sabinianus concerning a freedman (libertus) of Sabinianus who had escaped and been staying with him. “YOUR freedman …has been with me…” The runaway had known Pliny previously. The occasion of the letter was to intercede on the behalf of the runaway, so that he may return with full pardon. Pliny has authority over Sabinianus if he chose to exert it, “I should seem rather to compel than request you to forgive him…” Yet he is careful to use persuasion rather than authority. Pliny asks for clemency by appealing to Sabinianus’ affection, kindness, mercy, and mildness of temper.

Paul wrote to Philemon concerning an escaped slave of Philemon, one Onesimus (v. 10) who had been staying with Paul. The occasion of the letter was to intercede on the behalf of the runaway, so that he may return with full pardon, no longer a slave (v.16). Paul had a superior position over Philemon. “I have the full right in Christ to order you to do what is proper” v8. Yet he is careful to use persuasion rather than authority. “but I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that the good you do might not be forced but voluntary.” v. 14. Paul appeals to Philemon’ good will in Christ and love (v. 9).

The epistle to Philemon was constructed using the technique of lifting phrases from other epistles.

“why does Paul call himself in Phlm 9 desmios Christou Iêsou, and not as elsewhere doulos or apostolos? The answer is found in Eph 3:1; 4:1.
What is meant by the inclusion of other names besides that of Philemon among the addressees? For an answer see 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1.
Archippus comes from Col 4:17 — The epithets sunergos and sunstratiôtês from Phil 2:25 — The "church which in the house of" from Cor 4:15 — The prayer in v 3 from Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2; or Phil 1:2 — The thanksgiving and commemoration of v 4 from Rom 1:8, 9; 1 Cor 1:4 Eph 1:16, 5:20; Phil 1:3; Col 1:3.
The continual hearing of Philemon's love and faith towards all the saints (v 5) comes from Eph 1:15; Col 1:4 —
The expression hon egennêsa (v 10) from 1 Cor 4:15; cf. Gal 4:19.
The sending of' Onesimus in vv 10f. comes from Col 4:8 or Eph 6:21f., although in these passages it is Tychicus, a free man —
The phrase pros hôran of v 15 from 2 Cor 7:8; Gal 2:5 —
The "brother beloved" and "servant of the Lord" of v 16 from Col 4:7, 9 —

The "reckoning" of v 18 from Phil 4:15 —
The "I Paul" in v 19 from Gal 5:2, Eph 3:1 —
The phrase "with my hand" from 1 Cor 16:21, Gal 6:11, Col 4:18 —
The names in vv 23f from Col 1:7, 4:10, 12, 14, although now Epaphras takes the place of Aristarchus, "the fellow-prisoner," as Onesimus a slave takes the place of the free man, the "brother beloved," in Col 4:9. The final benediction comes from Phil 4:23.”
Reference: The Epistle to Philemon, W. C. Van Manen

Philemon is the Marcionite equivalent to the prodigal son, which did not appear in their gospel.

Jake Jones IV

jakejonesiv

Conservative scholars place stock in the mere assertions of the text that is was written by a well known Christian figure of an earlier generation. But, like the genre of the Apocalypse, the early Christian epistle is uniformly pseudepigraphal. The apologists still cling to the apostolic authorship of all of the NT epistles, but the conclusion of pseudepigraphy is widely assented to, with the exception of the seven allegedly genuine epistles of Paul. But as has been demonstrated with Philemon, that assertion is shaky.

I will take the time to illustrate the artifice of the pseudepigraphal author by using the epistle of 2 Peter as an example, since only apologists plead for authenticity. The epistle begins with a lie, the false claim of authorship, “Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ” 1:1. There is the false claim of being an eyewitness to Jesus, “For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.” 2 Peter 1:16. Please notice that the denial “we have not followed cunningly devised fables” is followed immediately by the lie “we were eyewitness to his majesty.” This Denial-Lie pairing is something we will see many times.
Literary-Sphragis. Makes reference (either implicit or explicit) to earlier works in order to establish the bone fides of the current epistle. “This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance” 3:1. The forger also makes reference to the Transfiguration story of the gospels, at which Peter was allegedly present.
Anachronism: The pseudepigraphal author will make references to items or events that are anachronistic to the time of the purported author. “Paul … in all his epistles...” 2 Peter 3:15-16. There was no collection of Pauline epistles before the alleged death of Peter.

But there is no bright dividing line between the deutero or minor epistles and the so-called authentic epistles. The separation is purely arbitrary. They are all, without distinction, pseudepigrapha. The external and internal indicators of authenticity are just as weak in the favored seven as they are in the acknowledged pseudepigraphia. And I include all the New Testament epistles, not just the Pauline. (We may make a possible exception the Epistle to the Hebrews since no claim of authorship is made).

OK, let’s look at the duetero-Pauline epistle to the Colossians. Paul never visited there, and he was not the founder of the Colossian community. 2:1. At least this much is true.

Colossians uses 87 words not found in the presumably authentic Pauline epistles.

There is no unity of authorship. The style immediately reveals we are reading a different author. We find a run on string of genetives in 1:5, 2:2, 1:12, 1:13, 1:27, 2:2, 2:12 that we do not find consistently elsewhere in the Pauline epistles. The author proceeds by creating long, run-on sentences, strung together from phrases found in other Pauline works.

Colossians is a pseudepigraphical work that uses incidental details to camouflage its inauthenticity.
1:1 claims to have been written by Apostle Paul, whom Terullian labels the hereticorum apostolus (Adv. Mar. 3.5).
1:1 Timothy is Paul’s “brother”
1:7 Epahras, the beloved “fellow slave”
4:7-15 names six others as his ministry associates. One man to complete Paul’s work.
2:1 contends for Christians in Laodicea and Colossae even though Paul has never met them.
4:18 uses the forgers tipoff “I, Paul” and claims to be signing in his own hand.

In Colossians, along with edification and exhortation, we find the doctrine of Christ is expounded and enlarged (1:13-22, 2:11-15) along with that of Paul (1:23-2:5).

Paul is a co-redeemer with Christ, 1:24. Indeed, Paul’s sufferings completes the work of what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ! This elevation of Paul to near divinity is an evolution that takes place over time after his presumed death. That Paul is “absent in the flesh, yet I am with you in spirit” (Col. 2:5) is clear wink to his long ago death. Paul’s stewardship to bring to completion (something Christ didn’t do) the word of God is the “mystery hidden from ages and from generations past.” Quite right. The elevated position of Paul is a new doctrine unknown to past Pauline/Marcionite generations. We see where this is leading; the Marcionite doctrine that Paul is on the right hand of Christ in heaven.

So what has changed? The epistle marks the point at which hyper-Paulinism takes a decidedly Gnostic turn. The indicators are that Marcionism had encountered the full blown Gnosticism of the second century. For example, we find reference to the Sophia of Gnosis. There is no need to postulate an undocumented first century proto-gnosticsm, as the Sitz im Leben is the second century.

Jake Jones IV

jakejonesiv

I want to point out that the presumed provenance of the epistle to the Romans is out of sync with the evidence.

Supposedly, we have the Apostle Paul ca. 58 CE writing to the Church in Rome, a church that is already familiar and in agreement with Pauline doctrine. As Van Manen noted, the presumed Christians who are the recepients of that letter must be Pauline Christinas who are fully aware of the nuances of Pauline doctrine. (Else the arguments "Paul" makes are indecipherable). Yet, we find as late as the middle of the second century the Roman church has scarcely any familiarity with Paul or his doctrines. Justin, his student Tatian, Papais and others had no information on Paul. What had happened to the illustious epistle and all the friends and supporters of Paul? Had they disappeared and left scarcely a trace in next generations? Had the epistle lain buried in the archives of the Roman church for nearly a century until it emerged again to the light of day --- in the possession of Marcion!??

There is something very wrong with the traditional dating of the Epistle to the Romans.

Jake Jones

jakejonesiv

2 Corinthians is a composite of several fragments poorly stiched together. It is almost as if the various sheets were dropped and reassembled incorrectly along with a bit of extraneous material.

Let's start by eliminating the extraneous material. The section 6:14-7:1 does not belong in the Pauline context. It may be part of a synagogue apocalyptic sermon warning against assimilation that got mixed in to the stack. Perhaps the previous fragment of 2 Cor had been copied onto the blank back of this sermon fragment, and the editor just turned over and continued copying.

Next we can eliminate the two Fund Raising letters. The first is chapter 9, and the second is in chpater 8. This are most likely Pauline--and by that I mean written by Pauline Christians, but not necessarily the historical Paul. It is unlikely that fund raising for other areas would be carried on during the midst of a crisis where the future of Pauline Christianity itself was in the balance. This likely represents a time after the crisis and reconciliation were past.

OK, what was the situation before the crisis before the opponents appeared? Apparently, there was a relatively tranquil community in which Gentiles and Hellenized Jews could worship together without too much concern about Judaism or the Jewish law. The only requirement appears to be faith in a salvation cult diety called Jesus Christ. They looked a founder named Paul.

But that changed when a very powerful sect of opponents arrived. These opponents were Judaizers with gnostic elements and it looked as if the community might forsake Paul altogether.

The "Letter of Sorrows" addresses this crisis posthumously in the name of Paul. It is difficult to recreate this letter in order from the fragments, but more or less it would be in order, 10:1-13:9a, 2:14-6:13, 7:2-4, and ending with 13:9b-14. If the Pauline movement lost here, they would most likely have been swept from the field everywhere in the east by the Judaizers. This was do or die.

The "Letter of Reconciliation" followed when the opponents had been repulsed, and the Pauline legacy (basically a Mystery Cult) was again secure. It would be, more or less, 1:1-2:13, 7:5-16. I think this conflict with the Judaizers is what prompted the development of Pauline antinomianism. If the community had a previously fully developed antinomian doctrine, the Judaizers would have had no foothold when they came. Probably beforehand, people believed whatever they pleased in this respect since it was not a point of controversy. But when the Judaizers came and attempted to destroy Pauline Christianity (the attack was nothing less than this) the forceful antinomianism (as in 2 Cor. 3:7) developed in response. The result was Marcion, the Paraclete.

Jake Jones IV

jakejonesiv

Philippians, as the other Pauline epistles, shows evidence of redaction. In one sentence, Paul is made to utter completely opposite things. First, Paul states that he puts no confidence in the flesh.
“… we who worship through the Spirit of God, who boast in Christ Jesus and do not put our confidence in flesh“ (3:3).

Immediately this is followed by the most blatant contradiction, “although I myself have grounds for confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he can be confident in flesh, all the more can I.” (3:4)

This is nonsense of course, until one realizes that a catholic redactor was attempting to undermine a Marcionite/Pauline doctrine.

The letter abounds with clues to its in pseudepigraphical nature.

The letter writer of Philippians and its readers share a background of Paul’s death in the dim past. The epistle is filled with this literary foreshadowing.

His colleagues are long dead, enshrined now in the book of life. Phil 4:3. The “bishops and deacons” reveal a church organization far in advance with Paul’s putative time.

Paul is hovering between life and death (Phil 1:21-22). He will have a second coming (2:24) by returning in pseudepigraphical letters.

Paul’s absence (2:12) is a reference to Paul’s alleged death long ago. The death of Paul had in the intervening period become a complimentary sacrifice alongside Christ himself 2:16-17. He shares in Christ’s suffering (3:10) as he races towards his perfection, his legendary death at the headsman axe --poured out as a libation upon the sacrificial service of faith, 2:17.

Reference: PNNT, R.Price.

Jake

jakejonesiv

Cerinthus the Heresiarch

We may build up a profile of the opponents at Corinth from 2 Corinthians chapters 11-12. Things in Corinth were very tense. An established Pauline community had been invaded by an outside group of "Super Apostles" who performed mighty deeds and wonders. The intruders were Judaisers, seeking to subvert Pauline teaching with Jewish law. They taught another Jesus, an adoptionist Christology that worshipped the Christ Spirit while damning the human Jesus according to the flesh, with much boasting. They were Wisdom preachers who excelled at public speaking. They are contemptuous of Paul, saying he was no apostle, whose teachings were weak and foolish. They discredited the principle of gratuitous teaching, implying it was worth just what was charged--nothing. They did not hesitate to accept support from the community.

Things were dire. The intruders were proponents of sensually satisfaction and were leading the people into impurity, immorality, and licentiousness. They were false apostles; deceitful, and cunning, masquerading satanic ministers. None could withstand their debate. The Great Apostle, Paul, was gone and long rumored to be dead. But he would return again—as was his wont—from beyond the grave in terrifying epistles.

In this article, we shall attempt to identify the opponents who came to Corinth.[0]

Cerinthus belonged to the early second century. The school of the Cerinthians was at its very peak in Asia Minor, and in Galatia. [1] Far from the reach of orthodoxy [2], the Cerinthians and Marcionites competed in the same areas. [3]
The Cerinthians followed the Jewish law and opposed Pauline/Marcionite Christianity.

Cerinthus' primary doctrines were recorded by Irenaeus and Hippolytus. [4] It was an unusual and mixture of Legalism, the Gnostic doctrine of creation by lesser powers, and the forerunner of Ebionite Christology. Cerinthus taught the world was not made by the supreme god, but was made by angels. The law-giver angel was one of the angels who made the world. He distinguished sharply between the human Jesus and the spiritual Christ. Jesus was merely the human off spring of Joseph and Mary through ordinary human generation. The spiritual Christ descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove at the baptism and left him at the crucifixion. According to Cerinthus, Christ was impassible and never suffered, while the human Jesus suffered and died. The Cerinthians were divided among themselves about whether Jesus had been yet resurrected, or would be resurrected
in the future general resurrection. Most, it seems believed there would be no resurrection at all. [5]

"Cerinthus, however, himself having been trained in Egypt, determined that the world was not made by the first God, but by a certain angelic power. And this power was far separated and distant from that sovereignty which is above the entire circle of existence, and it knows not the God (that is) above all things. And he says that Jesus was not born of a virgin, but that he sprang from Joseph and Mary as their son, similar to the rest of men; and that He excelled in justice, and prudence, and understanding above all the rest of mankind. And Cerinthus maintains that, after Jesus' baptism, Christ came down in the form of a dove upon Him from the sovereignty that is above the whole circle of existence, and that then He proceeded to preach the unknown Father, and to work miracles. And he asserts that, at the conclusion of the passion, Christ flew away from Jesus, but that Jesus suffered, and that Christ remained incapable of suffering, being a spirit of the Lord." [6]

Cerinthus was tightly coupled to Ephesus and the apostle John in an apocryphal tale recorded by Irenaeus.[7] The same tale is retold with slight variation concerning Polycarp and Marcion. [8]

Cerinthus fits well with the Jewish Christian opponents who opposed Paul—and the "Paulinized" Peter of Acts. Cerinthus, like the Ebonites, hated Paul. [9]

Cerinthus was anachronistically cast back into the time of the apostles as the prime Judaiser who challenged Peter (re Cornelius [10]) and Paul, spying out his freedom in Galatia [11] and the circumcision of Timothy [12]. The real conflict
is between the second century followers of Cerinthus and Paul in Asia Minor. [13]

The Cerinthians, and similar Jewish Christian groups, taught an extreme version of Legalism, "Except ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses, ye cannot be saved." [14] This is precisely the position the Pauline/Marcionite Christians
fought against through the terrifying pseudononymous epistles of their legendary founder, the Apostle Paul. [15] The conflict recorded in the 1st & 2nd Corinthian epistles is the conflict between the early second century Marcionites and the Cerinthians, cast back into the apostolic era in the figures of Cerinthus and Paul. Cerinthus is one of the "Super Apostles" opposing Paul. And these are the ones, explicitly including Cerinthus according to Epiphanius, that the apostle Paul called "false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ." [16]

The smoking gun in this matter is the "baptism for the dead." When any Cerinthians died before being baptized, living members would be baptized using their names. This would prevent the deceased from coming under the power of the authority that made the world by rising unbaptized at the general resurrection. [17] Paul used this practice and the division of his opponents over the issue of the resurrection against them. "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead?" [18]

Epiphanius recorded that he heard a tradition that Paul's argument concerning the baptism for the dead was aimed explicitly at the Cerinthians.
`And the tradition I heard says that this is why the holy apostle said, "If the dead rise not at all, why are they baptized for them?" … Some of these people preach that Christ is not risen yet, but will rise with everyone; others that
the dead will rise not at all. Hence the apostle came forward and gave the refutation of them both, and the other sects, about resurrection' [19]

We can now see quite clearly both sides of the argument in many places in the Corinthian epistles that are quite difficult otherwise. What kind of Christian, speaking "in the spirit" could say "Jesus be damned!?" [20] Only those who separate the human Jesus and worship exclusively the spiritual Christ. What matter if Jesus had been left to suffer while the Christ spirit flew away? [21]

It has been noted above that the Cerinthians taught "Except ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses, ye cannot be saved." [22] This is completely at odds with the Pauline antinominism that the Ten Commandments given on Mt. Sinai were
"...the ministration of death, written and engraved in stones." [23] On the subject of circumcision [24], the Marcionite redaction of the Pauline epistles is unyielding. "Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be
circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all." [25] The Marcionites, by way of contrast, were Docetae.

These passages against the circumcision of Christian converts are so familiar it is hard to imagine a Christian response to it. But now we can know what the other side was saying, and it is one not easily answered. "It is enough for the disciple to be as his master. What does that mean? Christ was circumcised; you be circumcised too! Christ lived by the law, you do the same!" [26]

Cerinthus claimed to have received revelations of angels written by a great apostle. The angels revealed a Kingdom of Christ would be set up on earth for a thousand years filled with sensual pleasure [27] and marriage feasts. [28] The reference is certainly to the book of Revelation, with the thousand year reign of the faithful with Christ being found in 20.4, the marriage feast 19:5, the angels 1:1 etc, and the great apostle "John" 1;1, 4:7 etc.

Revelation was slow to be accepted in the canon; it was suspected to be of heretical origin. According to the Alogi [29] and Caius [30], the strange book was written by Cerinthus himself. Whether Cerinthus actually wrote Revelation, he is its first known proponent. His chiliastic views may shed light upon another odd point made against Paul's opponents at Corinth being kings and reigning, while at the same time being sensually satisfied. [31] The seemingly contradictory doctrines of the Cerinthians concerning the resurrection and the millennium may be that they really taught a type of realized eschatology that
was hard to understand, and easy to attack.

As noted above, an apocryphal tale associated Cerinthus and John at Ephesus. And there is a letter from the Apostle Paul to Ephesus. [32] Thus the Cerinthians and the Marcionites of the early second century would have been in conflict here also. Indeed the Letter to Ephesus in Revelation takes a slap at the Apostle Paul. "You have tested those who call themselves apostles but are not, and discovered that they are impostors." [33]

_______________________________________________
End Notes
[0] Thanks to Dr. Hermann Detering, Berlin, for sharing his unpublished study with me; Paulus versus Cerinth – 1. und 2. Korintherbrief.
[1] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.6.4
[2] Marcion was from Sinope in Pontus. Irenaeus AH 1.27.2; Tertullian AM 1.1.
Marcion had the first known collection of Pauline letters. Before Marcion came
to Rome with the Apostilicon, Paul was not prominently known in the West, if he
was known at all. Thus the priority of Paul was with Marcion. Considering the
dates (early 2c) and the location (Asia Minor), the Pauline Christians
encountered by Cerinthus could only have been Marcionites.
[3] _Orthodoxy and Heresy in earliest Christianity_, by Walter Bauer, translated
by a team from the Philadelphia Seminar on Christian Origins, and edited by
Robert A. Kraft and Gerhard Krodel, Sigler press, Mifflintown, PA, 1996.
Copyright © 1971 Fortress Press. "However, east of Phrygian Hierapolis we could
hardly discern any traces of orthodoxy. Christianity and heresy were essentially
synonymous here." Page 229.
[4] Irenaeus AH 1.26.1 Cerinthus, again, a man who was educated in the wisdom of
the Egyptians [Latin variant "in Asia", W.Bauer 49.n21], taught that the world
was not made by the primary God, but by a certain Power far separated from him,
and at a distance from that Principality who is supreme over the universe, and
ignorant of him who is above all. He represented Jesus as having not been born
of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary
course of human generation, while he nevertheless was more righteous, prudent,
and wise than other men. Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him
in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the
unknown Father, and performed miracles. But at last Christ departed from Jesus,
and that then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ remained impassible,
inasmuch as he was a spiritual being.
cf Hippolytus, Ref 7.21 But a certain Cerinthus, himself being disciplined in
the teaching of the Egyptians, asserted that the world was not made by the
primal Deity, but by some virtue which was an offshoot from that Power which is
above all things, and which (yet) is ignorant of the God that is above all. And
he supposed that Jesus was not generated from a virgin, but that he was born son
of Joseph and Mary, just in a manner similar with the rest of men, and that
(Jesus) was more just and more wise (than all the human race). And (Cerinthus
alleges) that, after the baptism (of our Lord), Christ in form of a dove came
down upon him, from that absolute sovereignty which is above all things. And
then, (according to this heretic,) Jesus proceeded to preach the unknown Father,
and in attestation (of his mission) to work miracles. It was, however, (the
opinion of Cerinthus,) that ultimately Christ departed from Jesus, and that
Jesus suffered and rose again; whereas that Christ, being spiritual, remained
beyond the possibility of suffering.
[5] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.6.6. "Some of these people preach that Christ is
not risen yet, but will rise with everyone; others that the dead will rise not
at all." The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis: Sects 1-46, page 110. Brill
Academic Publishers (September 1987), translated by Frank Williams. ©
[6] Hippolytus, Ref 10:17
[7] Irenaeus AH 3.3.4 There are also those who heard from him that John, the
disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus
within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, "Let us fly,
lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth,
is within." cf . Eusebius: EH 4.14.6-7. Epiphanius relates the same tale but
substitutes "Ebion" for "Cerinthus."
[8] And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and
said, "Dost thou know me?" "I do know thee, the first-born of Satan." Ibid.
[9] Filaster Her. 36, Panarion of Epiphanius 28.5.3, which probably reflect
the lost Syntagma of Hippolytus. See also Eusebius EH 4.29.5 Tatian the Assyrian
rejected Paul's Letters; EH 6.38 the Elchasai rejected Paul entirely;
[10] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.2.4
[11] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.4.2-3
[12] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.4.1
[13] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.8.2 "… his supporters did too, and in Asia. But
it makes no difference whether it was he or whether it was another colleague who
supported him, whose views were similar, and who acted for the same ends. The
badness of their teaching is all of this sort, although they are called both
Cerinthians and Merinthians."
[14] Panarion 28.4.5, Acts 15:1
[15] Paul is dead. He is "absent in body but present in spirit" (1 Cor. 5:3).
To be "absent from the body" is to be "present with the Lord" (2 Cor. 5:8).
There had been multiple reports of his death, 2 Corinthians 11:23-26. Paul, like
the fictitious Pauline copy-cat Ignatius, had been martyred by the wild beasts;
in Ephesus in Asia Minor. "… I die daily. If after the manner of men I have
fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not?" 1
Cor. 15:31-32.
How, then we may ask, if Paul had died multiple times, even daily like Jesus in
the Eucharist 1 Cor. 15:31, had he still been able to send epistles? The answer
is that Paul had been resurrected! 2 Corinthians 1:8-9.
The risen Paul communicates through terrifying posthumous letters. 2 Cor. 10:9.
It is Paul's "signature move." He is the paper Apostle. Paul had come to the
Corinthians three times by epistles, each constituting a separate witness to
Paul's message. 2 Cor. 13;1-2. If the "comings" had been physical visits by the
historical Paul, or even if all the letters to the Corinthians had been written
by the alleged historical Paul, the appeal to "two or three witnesses" would be
meaningless.
The "spirit of Paul" sent forth his own emissaries in the form of the bearers of
his posthumous letters. The epistles in reality were written by later followers,
channeling what Paul "would have said;" e.g. 1 Corinthians, Sosthenes; 2
Corinthians 1:1, Timothy. The bearers of these letters would use them as
credentials with the various Pauline churches. In the letters to the
Corinthians, Paul battles his arch enemy Cerinthus.
[16] 2 Corinthians 11:13.
[17] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.6.4
[18] 1 Corinthians 15:29 KJV.
[19] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.6.6. _The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis:
Sects 1-46_, page 110. Brill Academic Publishers (September 1987), translated
by Frank Williams. ©
[20] 1 Corinthians 12:3.
Dr. Detering, Paulus versus Cerinth – 1. und 2. Korintherbrief, takes
another view; 12:2-3 is a later insertion by which the Catholic redactor warning
of gnostic dualistic rejection of the earthly Jesus.
"Es ist klar, daß es sich 12:2-3 um einen späteren Einschub handelt, mit deren
Hilfe der katholische Redaktor vor der gnostisch dualistischen Verwerfung des
irdischen Jesus warnen will. Bestätigt wird diese Vermutung durch einen Blick
auf die marcionitische Rezension, in der 12:1 zwar bezeugt ist, aber zwischen
12-2-7 eine Lücke klafft. Auch wenn die Rekonstruktion der marcionitischen
Version kein Urteil darüber erlaubt, was zwischen 12:2-7 fehlte und wie der
Wortlaut der Stelle im einzelnen ausgesehen haben mag, ist es methodisch
durchaus legitim, in ihr eine Stütze der hier vertretenen Ansicht zu sehen."
[21] cf the Cainite Gnostics who, according to Origen, cursed the human Jesus
as the unclean vessel of the Christ Spirit.
[22] cf. Matthew 19:17 "…if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments."
The Cerinthians used an early shorter version of Matthew. Panarion of Epiphanius
28.5.1. This is not at all surprising, since the full gospel of Matthew in its
canonical form did not appear before 180 CE. Cerinthus also used Mark, Irenaeus
AH 3.11.7.
[23] 2 Corinthians 3:7
[24] The debate over circumcision was unresolved in the second century. Trypho
47:1-2, IgnPhld 6:1.
[25] Galatians 5:2. cf Phillipians 3:2, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers,
beware of the mutilation"
[26] Panarion of Epiphanius 28.5.1-2.
[27] Eusebius EH 3.28.5. And as he was himself devoted to the pleasures of the
body and altogether sensual in his nature, he dreamed that that kingdom would
consist in those things which he desired, namely, in the delights of the belly
and of sexual passion, that is to say, in eating and drinking and marrying, and
in festivals and sacrifices and the slaying of victims, under the guise of which
he thought he could indulge his appetites with a better grace.
[28] Eusebius EH 3.28.2 "But Cerinthus also, by means of revelations which he
pretends were written by a great apostle, brings before us marvelous things
which he falsely claims were shown him by angels; and he says that after the
resurrection the kingdom of Christ will be set up on earth, and that the flesh
dwelling in Jerusalem will again be subject to desires and pleasures. And being
an enemy of the Scriptures of God, he asserts, with the purpose of deceiving
men, that there is to be a period of a thousand years for marriage festivals."
Caius rejected the apostolic authorship of Revelation.
[29] Hippolytus "On the Gospel and Apocalypse of John," Epiphanius Her. 51.3.
`"What good," they [the Alogi] said, "is the Apocalypse to me, with its seven
angels and seven seals? What have I to do with the four angels at Euphrates,
whom another angel must loose, and the host of horsemen with breastplates of
fire and brimstone?" They seem to have been jejune rationalists opposed to
chiliasm and all mysterious doctrines. They absurdly attributed the writings of
John to the Gnostic, Cerinthus, whom the aged apostle opposed.
[30] Eusebius EH 3.28.2
[31] 1 Corinthians 4:8 You already have all you want! You have already become
rich! You have become kings without us! I wish you really were kings so that we
could be kings with you! Rev. 20:4 Then I saw thrones, and those who sat on them
were given authority to judge.
[32] Ephesians 1:1. Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus.
[33] Revelation 2:2
Jake Jones IV

PhilosopherJay

Hi jakesjonesiv,

Good points about all the epistles.

I guess the dating of all Paul's epistles are based on the assumption that Acts of the Apostles is a real and independent history of Paul. The epistles are then placed within the time-line of that history as well as possible.

If the letters are being written or edited after Acts, then the dating of all the epistles become nonsense.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

show_no_mercy

What do you make of the assertion that the Alogi said that Cerinthus is the original author of the Logos gospel (John)? Isn't it a coincidence that Cerinthus was "schooled in the wisdom of the Egyptians" when Philo established philosophy schools in Egypt teaching his Logos idea?

jakejonesiv

Hi show_no_mercy,

That is possible. We see signs of a gnosticizing Judaism in GJohn that may be consistent with Cerinthus. Epiphanius records that the Algoi rejected both Revelation and the Gospel of John as works of Cerinthus the Heresiarch, the enemy of the Apostle.

I would caution that the fourth gospel has apparently gone through several redactions, and/or combined separate documents. Irenaeus admits that it was in the possesion of the heretics, particularly the Valentinians. We see, in addition the stong indication of Marcionite influence in that no one before Jesus had seen or known God, and the Jewish Law is called "Your Law." The Marcionites also claimed the Paraclete was Paul. The final redaction was proto-orthodox, with the insertion of the pro-flesh statements. The redactional history of GJohn is fully fascinating as the PE.

What do you think?

Best,
Jake Jones IV

jakejonesiv

Did Paul never tell the Thessalonians about the general resurrection before writing this epistle? It would seem that Paul would have let the Thessalonians in on the doctrine of the general resurrection in face to face preaching prior to writing it in a letter.

Did Paul--occasioned by a death in Thessolonica--create a new doctrine? And only after having 'reasoned it out' as in 4:14, wrote to inform them of the new discovery, as 4:13 states, "We do not want you to be unaware..".

This makes no sense. The occasional reason for the letter is historically improbable. Indeed, Paul goes on to write that it is superfluous to write to the Thessalonians concerning the "Day of the Lord" (5:2), but he goes on and does it anyway!

So what is really going on here? The church receiving the letter is not a first generation fire-brand apocalyptic sect living in the immediate expectation of the Parousia that suddenly realizes that Paul had made no provision for the death of members. Rather, in the pastoral advice (4:2-12, 5:12-15, etc) we see a second--or latter--generation church that has accomodated itself to the daily life of surrounding society. This is a mature church, the earliest problems that Pauline Christianity had, i.e. with the Judaizers, are not at issue here. So 1 Thessalonians is not the earliest Pauline epistle. 1 Corinthians is a much better candidate where we can see Pauline doctrine being formed in the midst of crisis, as with the resurrection discusssion in chapter 15.

1 Thessalonians 2:16 must refer to the final end of Jewish nationalism and the expulsion of the Jews from Palestine with the defeat of bar Kochba in 136 CE. (If not that, then the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE. In either case, after the traditional date of Paul's death).

The authorship of 1 Thessalonians is fictive. "I, Paul" (the pseudonymous formula) is far away battling Satan (2:18). The author is writing in the name of the dear departed Paul, who had been with them long before (3:4). The doctrines revealed are not foundational, but a "school master-like" review to rebut non-Pauline beilefs and practices that had crept in the current
time of the pseudonymous author.

See The Pre-Nicene New Testament (or via: amazon.co.uk), Robert M. Price, 2006, pages 425ff.

Best,
Jake Jones IV