Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 04-10-2009, 03:47 AM

Has anyone remarked upon this before? Surely the story about Paul and the Lion in the apocryphal "Acts of Paul" has been taken from Aesop's fables. Remember the mouse who took the thorn from the lion's paw? Well that was St. Paul who baptised it instead. The Hellenistic gnostic apocryphal author Aesoped the canon.

The following is taken from Glenn Davis' Acts of Paul

Quote:

....We find a description of the physical appearance of Paul:

A man small in size, with a bald head and crooked legs; in good health; with eyebrows that met and a rather prominent nose; full of grace, for sometimes he looked like a man and sometimes he looked like an angel.

Another episode concerns the Apostle and the baptized lion. Although previously known from allusions to it in patristic writers, it was not until 1936 that the complete text was made available from a recently discovered Greek papyrus. Probably the imaginative writer had read Paul's rhetorical question: 'What do I gain if, humanly speaking, I fought with the wild beasts at Ephesus?' (I Cor. 15:32). Wishing to supply details to supplement this allusion, the author supplies a thrilling account of the intrepid apostle's experience at Ephesus. Interest is added when the reader learns that some time earlier in the wilds of the countryside Paul had preached to that very lion and, on its profession of faith, had baptized it. It is not surprising that the outcome of the confrontation in the amphitheater was the miraculous release of the apostle.

The heretical nature of the tractate was that it popularised the canon in a very unofficial manner. The greek populace went wild over the comparison to Aesop's Fables because it made them laugh. Nobody laughs today because the context of the history of the time in which the "Acts of Paul" was written is not clearly understood.

Has any other treatment of "The Acts of Paul" mentioned the possible use by the author of "Aesop's Fables"?

razlyubleno · 04-10-2009, 04:49 AM

I'm going to be really unhelpful and say that I vaguely remember reading something about this somewhere.

Anyway, wasn't it pretty much to be expected that Christian stories would assimilate Greek ones? Acts 17 casts Paul as Socrates, challenging Athenians in the marketplace, and portrays the city in a terribly romantic light... there was surely a great deal of respect for classical Greece among the Christians, no? And wasn't it Justin Martyr who defended Christianity to the Romans by recasting classical Greeks as kind of "Christians-before-Christ"?

Sorry if that's vaguely off-topic.

razly

DCHindley · 04-11-2009, 07:28 AM

I cannot speak to studies of Aesopic influence in The Acts of Paul, but Matt 11:17 = Luke 7:32 ('We piped to you, and you did not dance; we wailed, and you did not mourn') seems to be derived from Aesop.

Herodotus also tells a tale in which this kind of thing is relayed. King Cyrus of Persia chides the representatives of the Ionian and Aeolian Greeks for refusing his original terms (to become his vassals and pay tribute) when they thought they were in a position of strength, but come hat-in-hand seeking the same terms when their strongest ally, king Croesus of Lydia, was defeated by Cyrus.

He is said to have replied: 'Cease your dancing now, as you did not choose to come and dance when I piped to you.'

Aesop's fables have come down in a variety of forms so the original forms are hard to reconstruct, but the story of the fish and a piping fisherman is one of them. The following web source is not scholarly, but may illuminate:

"O you most perverse creatures, when I piped you would not dance,
but now that I have ceased you do so merrily."

http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop...ishermanPiping

"Ah, you dance now when I play," said he. "Yes," said an old Fish: "When you are in a man's power you must do as he bids you."

http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop...fabl/TheFisher

More about this web site's sources:
http://www.aesopfables.com/more.html

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Has anyone remarked upon this before? Surely the story about Paul and the Lion in the apocryphal "Acts of Paul" has been taken from Aesop's fables. Remember the mouse who took the thorn from the lion's paw? Well that was St. Paul who baptised it instead. The Hellenistic gnostic apocryphal author Aesoped the canon.

The following is taken from Glenn Davis' Acts of Paul

Quote:

....We find a description of the physical appearance of Paul:

A man small in size, with a bald head and crooked legs; in good health; with eyebrows that met and a rather prominent nose; full of grace, for sometimes he looked like a man and sometimes he looked like an angel.

Another episode concerns the Apostle and the baptized lion. Although previously known from allusions to it in patristic writers, it was not until 1936 that the complete text was made available from a recently discovered Greek papyrus. Probably the imaginative writer had read Paul's rhetorical question: 'What do I gain if, humanly speaking, I fought with the wild beasts at Ephesus?' (I Cor. 15:32). Wishing to supply details to supplement this allusion, the author supplies a thrilling account of the intrepid apostle's experience at Ephesus. Interest is added when the reader learns that some time earlier in the wilds of the countryside Paul had preached to that very lion and, on its profession of faith, had baptized it. It is not surprising that the outcome of the confrontation in the amphitheater was the miraculous release of the apostle.

The heretical nature of the tractate was that it popularised the canon in a very unofficial manner. The greek populace went wild over the comparison to Aesop's Fables because it made them laugh. Nobody laughs today because the context of the history of the time in which the "Acts of Paul" was written is not clearly understood.

Has any other treatment of "The Acts of Paul" mentioned the possible use by the author of "Aesop's Fables"?

mountainman · 04-14-2009, 06:49 PM

Thanks for this note DCHindley.

We should note that if this canonical use of Aesop is maintained then the Aesoped christians are the fishers of men and are in the position of power over the fish.

Quite contrarily if the non canonical use of Aesop is maintained Paul is cast in the position of the mouse against the lion. He overcomes this seeming impossible power struggle by baptising the lion. The Hellenistic romance is brought to a climax as Paul is thrown to the baptised and very christian lion, and the audience breathes a great sigh of relief in their association with the moralising of the ascetic gnostic author of the Acts of Paul: who obviously decided to take a leaf out of the canon, and jazz things up a little. Oh dear what terrible and extreme audacity had this author! Worthy to be struck down by canonical thunderbolts from above!!

The author of the Acts of Paul is variously reported as Leucius Charinus.
More than a few orthodox "authors" associate with this name from the
fourth century and beyond the additional brief description
"who was the disciple of the devil".

The preservers of the canon c.325 CE onwards clearly and simply
thought that it was "devilish" to have other authors
writing their "christian propaganda", and in fact
creating a more popular (albeit contraversial) series
of stories perhaps labelled "The Travels of the Apostles".

How else are we to attempt
an explanation of the apocrypha?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

I cannot speak to studies of Aesopic influence in The Acts of Paul, but Matt 11:17 = Luke 7:32 ('We piped to you, and you did not dance; we wailed, and you did not mourn') seems to be derived from Aesop.

Herodotus also tells a tale in which this kind of thing is relayed. King Cyrus of Persia chides the representatives of the Ionian and Aeolian Greeks for refusing his original terms (to become his vassals and pay tribute) when they thought they were in a position of strength, but come hat-in-hand seeking the same terms when their strongest ally, king Croesus of Lydia, was defeated by Cyrus.

He is said to have replied: 'Cease your dancing now, as you did not choose to come and dance when I piped to you.'

Aesop's fables have come down in a variety of forms so the original forms are hard to reconstruct, but the story of the fish and a piping fisherman is one of them. The following web source is not scholarly, but may illuminate:

"O you most perverse creatures, when I piped you would not dance,
but now that I have ceased you do so merrily."

http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop...ishermanPiping

"Ah, you dance now when I play," said he. "Yes," said an old Fish: "When you are in a man's power you must do as he bids you."

http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop...fabl/TheFisher

More about this web site's sources:
http://www.aesopfables.com/more.html

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Has anyone remarked upon this before? Surely the story about Paul and the Lion in the apocryphal "Acts of Paul" has been taken from Aesop's fables. Remember the mouse who took the thorn from the lion's paw? Well that was St. Paul who baptised it instead. The Hellenistic gnostic apocryphal author Aesoped the canon.

The following is taken from Glenn Davis' Acts of Paul

The heretical nature of the tractate was that it popularised the canon in a very unofficial manner. The greek populace went wild over the comparison to Aesop's Fables because it made them laugh. Nobody laughs today because the context of the history of the time in which the "Acts of Paul" was written is not clearly understood.

Has any other treatment of "The Acts of Paul" mentioned the possible use by the author of "Aesop's Fables"?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-10-2009, 04:49 AM	#2
razlyubleno Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Azerbaijan Posts: 120	I'm going to be really unhelpful and say that I vaguely remember reading something about this somewhere. Anyway, wasn't it pretty much to be expected that Christian stories would assimilate Greek ones? Acts 17 casts Paul as Socrates, challenging Athenians in the marketplace, and portrays the city in a terribly romantic light... there was surely a great deal of respect for classical Greece among the Christians, no? And wasn't it Justin Martyr who defended Christianity to the Romans by recasting classical Greeks as kind of "Christians-before-Christ"? Sorry if that's vaguely off-topic. razly

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.