Clivedurdle

Are there any possible reasons underlying the destinations? Thessalonica and Ephesus were very important pagan religious sites for example.

Ben C Smith

Yes. Paul had founded churches in those locales (except Rome) and was writing as an apostle keenly interested in their spiritual welfare. The fact that some were important pagan centers is probably relevant to why Paul chose to start churches in those cities.

Ben.

gstafleu

Ben, just out of curiosity. Do you think that Paul actually started the churches himself, or did he inherit an existing situation?

dog-on

Or were the Cities mentioned inserted after the fact... and were these even letters at all?

countjulian

Ummmmm... weren't all the cities of the Empire at that time "pagan centers?"

Huon

Both towns were important commercial centers, sheltering Jewish communities, who could possibly receive Paul. Ephesus was the center of the cult of Artemis.

Clivedurdle

I like to check out patterns. I don't know if there are any but has anyone asked why those places?

Paul set up churches there might not be enough of a reason. Were there not big churches in Alexandria and Southern France?

Huon

From Catholic Encyclopedia :

It appears to have been proved by Mgr Duchesne, despite the local traditions of many Churches, that in all three parts of Gaul in the second century there was but a single organized Church, that of Lyons. The "Deacon of Vienne", martyred at Lyons during the persecution of 177, was probably a deacon installed at Vienne by the ecclesiastical authority of Lyons.

Lyons was also the centre from which Christianity was gradually propagated throughout Gaul. The presence at Lyons of numerous Asiatic Christians and their almost daily communications with the Orient were likely to arouse the susceptibilities of the Gallo-Romans. A persecution arose under Marcus Aurelius. Its victims at Lyons numbered forty-eight, half of them of Greek origin, half Gallo-Roman, among others St Blandina, and St. Pothinus, first Bishop of Lyons, sent to Gaul by St Polycarp about the middle of the second century.

The legend according to which he was sent by St. Clement dates from the twelfth century and is without foundation. The letter addressed to the Christians of Asia and Phrygia in the name of the faithful of Vienne and Lyons, and relating the persecution of 177, is considered by Ernest Renan as one of the most extraordinary documents possessed by any literature; it is the baptismal certificate of Christianity in France. The successor of St. Pothinus was the illustrious St Irenaeus, 177-202.

Another info :

The Christian Museum at Marseilles possesses among other sarcophagi one dating from 273. The epitaph of Volusianus and Fortunatus, two Christians who perished by fire, martyrs perhaps, is one of the oldest Christian inscriptions (Le Blant, "Inscriptions chrétiennes de la Gaule", Paris, 1856-65).

Huon

From Catholic Encyclopedia : (Mark) :

It is assumed in this article that the individual referred to in Acts as John Mark (xii, 12, 25; xv, 37), John (xiii, 5, 13), Mark (xv, 39), is identical with the Mark mentioned by St. Paul (Colossians 4:10, 2 Timothy 4:11, Philemon 24) and by St. Peter (1 Peter 5:13).

The date at which Mark came to Alexandria is uncertain. The Chronicle of Eusebius assigns it to the first years of Claudius (A.D. 41-4), and later on states that St. Mark's first successor, Anianus, succeeded to the See of Alexandria in the eighth year of Nero (61-2). This would make Mark Bishop of Alexandria for a period of about twenty years. This is not impossible, if we might suppose in accordance with some early evidence that St. Peter came to Rome in A.D. 42, Mark perhaps accompanying him. But Acts raise considerable difficulties. On the assumption that the founder of the Church of Alexandria was identical with the companion of Paul and Barnabas, we find him at Jerusalem and Antioch about A.D. 46 (Acts 12:25), in Salamis about 47 (Acts 13:5), at Antioch again about 49 or 50 (Acts15:37-39), and when he quitted Antioch, on the separation of Paul and Barnabas, it was not to Alexandria but to Cyprus that he turned (Acts 15:39). There is nothing indeed to prove absolutely that all this is inconsistent with his being Bishop of Alexandria at the time, but seeing that the chronology of the Apostolic age is admittedly uncertain, and that we have no earlier authority than Eusebius for the date of the foundation of the Alexandrian Church, we may perhaps conclude with more probability that it was founded somewhat later. There is abundance of time between A.D. 50 and 60, a period during which the New Testament is silent in regard to St. Mark, for his activity in Egypt.


The Cath Encycl. seems somewhat uneasy... and Eusebius is not always truthful ...

Clivedurdle

There are more possibilities than that, monastacism is an oriental import for example. Might there be theological reasons for choosing these places for the letters?

A letter to Jerusalem?