Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 03-21-2013, 10:39 PM

Bernard,

Yes that seems to be true. But on another subject look at the order of the gospel numbered at the very beginning. It's a gospel harmony of some sort but I've never seen the ordering like that before. It begins with John and then goes into the Marcosian infancy narrative and then zig zags across the four gospels in a most perplexing order. What gospel is this?

stephan huller · 03-21-2013, 10:40 PM

Quote:

An examination of writings attributed to Justin Martyr readily shows that Justin Martyr did NOT acknowledge any writing called the Acts of the Apostles and did NOT make references to such a book or characters like Paul and Barnabas.

It's not that simple. Read Gregory's discussion on the preservation of Luke and Acts in Justin. I personally think that Justin's text is corrupt but if you don't there seems to be ambiguous allusions that could go either way.

aa5874 · 03-21-2013, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bernard Muller

From Epistola Apostolorum:
But he [resurrected Jesus] said unto us: Go ye and preach unto the twelve tribes, and preach also unto the heathen, and to all the land of Israel ... And unto the others also will I give my power, that they may teach the residue of the peoples.
31 And behold a man shall meet you, whose name is Saul, which being interpreted is Paul: he is a Jew, circumcised according to the law, and he shall receive my voice from heaven with fear and terror and trembling. And his eyes shall be blinded, and by your hands by the sign of the cross shall they be protected. Do ye unto him all that I have done unto you. Deliver it (? the word of God) unto the other. And at the same time that man shall open his eyes and praise the Lord, even my Father which is in heaven."
Whoever wrote that knew about 'Acts'.

Cordially, Bernard

The Epistula Apostolorum could have been written in the 4th century.

The earliest manuscript of the Epistula Apostolorum, the Epistles of the Apostles is from the late 4th -5th century.

See http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...ostolorum.html

In any event, the Epistula Apostolorum is a source of Fiction and highly questionable since it is claimed Jesus did tell the Apostles that the Second Coming would occur 120 or 150 years AFTER Pentecost.

maryhelena · 03-22-2013, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Hi Bernard,

Acts can't be trusted as history.

Jake

Perhaps that statement would be better as: "Acts is not history". Jake, using 'trusted' in your comment can be inferred as casting a negative strike against Acts. Whereas, 'Acts is not history', simply states the case as it is.

While the story of Acts, in this instance the story of Paul, is not history, that does not mean that the Paul story has no relevance to the history of early christianity. The question is what relevance. And if it's a story about Paul that we are dealing with - questions of trusting that story do not arise. It is what it is within the context of Acts. The basis question, the fundamental question, thus is - what sort of work is Acts? If there is no agreement on that question - then no debate over it's content is going to be fruitful.

I just love this quote on Acts, by Richard Pervo:

Quote:

Deriving history from Acts is an enterprise fraught with difficulty. I firmly maintain that Luke the Historian has very little to wear and have striven to demonstrate the point, but I shall not close without acknowledging my admiration (and even envy) for the splendid outfit worn by Luke the author. In that costume lurk mysteries galore, and because of it the story of Christian origins is more mysterious than ever.

The Mystery of Acts: Unraveling Its Story (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Yes, Pervo goes the traditional route re the Paul figure prior to 70 c.e.

However he also writes:

Quote:

What is the crime? The author of Acts committed a nearly "perfect crime.".....Luke T. Johnson, no radical skeptic, puts it this way: "So successful was Luke that his narrative has become the etiological or foundational myth of gentile Christianity." The same scholar also notes: "It witnesses to Luke's literary skill that for two millennia people thought he told the story just the way it happened, indeed, had to have happened. The story of the church's beginnings need not, however, have been told at all. It might also have been told very differently." I fully agree and, furthermore, have no desire to depose the myth and replace it with another one.

Whatever might be the the faults of Pervo's book on Acts, from an ahistoricist perspective, his approach to the material - and his love of it - can only be commended.

Quote:

For thirty years Acts has been the chief focus of my research and writing in the New Testament field........It is my favorite book of the Christian Bible; I love it. If some may wonder how this love can be expressed by apparently smashing Acts into pieces, I should reply that laughter follows tears, and that there can be no Easter without Good Friday.

aa5874 · 03-22-2013, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

.... The basis question, the fundamental question, thus is - what sort of work is Acts? If there is no agreement on that question - then no debate over it's content is going to be fruitful...

Such a question is actually irrelevant to the dating of the Pauline letters since there is NO admittance that Saul/Paul wrote letters to Churches in Acts of the Apostles.

Essentially, whether or NOT Acts of the Apostles is an historical account of Saul/Paul there is NO internal data that supports the presumption and speculation of Pauline letters Before c 62 CE.

After all, in Acts of the Apostles, the Saul/Paul character was supposedly still alive and living in Rome at c 62 CE in the time of Festus procurator of Judea. If Saul/Paul in Acts did actually Live then he could have written Letters AFTER c 62 CE.

There is simply NO statement at all, NO internal Data in Acts which shows that Saul/Paul did write or even wanted to write Letters to Churches before his arrival in Rome.

Up to the very last chapter of Acts it is claimed that NO letters were received about Saul/Paul up to c 62 CE.

Acts 28:21 NIV

Quote:

They replied, "We have not received any letters from Judea concerning you, and none of the brothers who have come from there has reported or said anything bad about you.

Acts of the Apostles does NOT corroborate the Presumption and Speculation that the Pauline were composed by Saul/Paul and were composed before c 62 CE.

The internal Data in Acts of the Apostles support the argument that the Pauline letters in or out the Canon are ALL forgeries if it is claimed they were composed by Saul/Paul before c 62 CE.

Bernard Muller · 03-22-2013, 08:10 AM

Hi Stephan,
You wrote:

Quote:

Bernard,
Yes that seems to be true.

What seems to be true?

Quote:

But on another subject look at the order of the gospel numbered at the very beginning. It's a gospel harmony of some sort but I've never seen the ordering like that before. It begins with John and then goes into the Marcosian infancy narrative and then zig zags across the four gospels in a most perplexing order. What gospel is this?

Well, the author of Epistola drew from the canonical gospels and 'Acts', plus, for the so-called Marcosian infancy, from either gospel of Thomas, or the infancy gospels, or Marcion. Why would the order matter?

Cordially, Bernard

aa5874 · 03-22-2013, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bernard Muller

...Well, the author of Epistola drew from the canonical gospels , plus, for the so-called Marcosian infancy, from either gospel of Thomas, or the infancy gospels, or Marcion. Why would the order matter?

Cordially, Bernard

You are merely guessing, speculating or working from imagination.

The claim that Jesus told the Apostles that the Second Coming would be 120 or 150 years AFTER Pentecost was NOT drawn from the Canonical Gospels.

And now examine this passage from the Epistula Apostolorum. Jesus was the Angel Gabriel. There is NO such story in the Canon.

Epistula Apostolorum

Quote:

14 For ye know that the angel Gabriel brought the message unto Mary. And we answered: Yea, Lord. He answered and said unto us: Remember ye not, then, that I said unto you a little while ago: I became an angel among the angels, and I became all things in all? We said unto him: Yea, Lord.

Then answered he and said unto us: On that day whereon I took the form of the angel Gabriel, I appeared unto Mary and spake with her.

Her heart accepted me, and she believed (She believed and laughed, Eth.), and I formed myself and entered into her body.

I became flesh, for I alone was a minister unto myself in that which concerned Mary (I was mine own messenger, Eth.) in the appearance of the shape of an angel. For so must I needs (or, was I wont to) do. Thereafter did I return to my Father...

Unless the author of the Epistula Apostolorum invented his story that Jesus was the Angel Gabriel then he did NOT get it from the Canonical Gospels.

There is NO evidence at all that the Epistula Apostolorum is an historical account of Jesus and the Apostles when it is riddled with fictitious events and contadicted by the supposed Jesus in gMark and gMatthew.

stephan huller · 03-22-2013, 09:25 AM

Bernard,

You know the history of this document right? There are many versions but only the Ethiopic preserves the beginning:

Quote:

1 The book which Jesus Christ revealed unto his disciples: and how that Jesus Christ revealed the book for the company (college) of the apostles, the disciples of Jesus Christ, even the book which is for all men. Simon and Cerinthus, the false apostles, concerning whom it is written that no man shall cleave unto them, for there is in them deceit wherewith they bring men to destruction. (The book hath been written) that ye may be not flinch nor be troubled, and depart not from the word of the Gospel which ye have heard. Like as we heard it, we keep it in remembrance and have written it for the whole world. We commend you our sons and our daughters in joy <in the grace of God (?)> in the name of God the Father the Lord of the world, and of Jesus Christ. Let grace be multiplied upon you.

2 We, John, Thomas, Peter, Andrew, James, Philip, Batholomew, Matthew, Nathanael, Judas Zelotes, and Cephas, write unto the churches of the east and the west, of the north and the south, the declaring and imparting unto you that which concerneth our Lord Jesus Christ: we do write according as we have seen and heard and touched him, after that he was risen from the dead: and how that he revealed unto us things mighty and wonderful and true.

3 This know we: that our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ is God the Son of God, who was sent of God the Lord of the whole world, the maker and creator of it, who is named by all names, and high above all powers, Lord of lords, King of kings, Ruler of rulers, the heavenly one, that sitteth above the cherubim and seraphim at the right hand of the throne of the Father: who by his word made the heavens, and formed the earth and that which is in it, and set bounds to the sea that it should not pass: the deeps also and fountains, that they should spring forth and flow over the earth: the day and the night, the sun and the moon, did he establish, and the stars in the heaven: that did separate the light from the darkness: that called forth hell, and in the twinkling of an eye ordained the rain of the winter, the snow (cloud), the hail, and the ice, and the days in their several seasons: that maketh the earth to quake and again establisheth it: that created man in his own image, after his likeness, and by the fathers of old and the prophets is it declared (or, and spake in parables with the fathers of old and the prophets in verity), of whom the apostles preached, and whom the disciples did touch. In God, the Lord, the Son of God, do we believe, that he is the word become flesh: that of Mary the holy virgin he took a body, begotten of the Holy Ghost, not of the will (lust) of the flesh, but by the will of God: that he was wrapped in swaddling clothes in Bethlehem and made manifest, and grew up and came to ripe age, when also we beheld it.

4 This did our Lord Jesus Christ, who was sent by Joseph and Mary his mother to be taught. [And] when he that taught him said unto him: Say Alpha: then answered he and said: Tell thou me first what is Beta (probably: Tell thou me first what is <Alpha and then will I tell thee what is> Beta. Cf. the Marcosian story quoted by Irenaeus (see above, Gospel of Thomas, p. 15). The story is in our texts of the Gospel of Thomas, and all the Infancy Gospels). This thing which then came to pass is to true and of verity.

5 Thereafter was there a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and they bade him with his mother and his brethren, and he changed water into wine. He raised the dead, he caused the lame to walk: him whose hand was withered he caused to stretch it out, and the woman which had suffered an issue of blood twelve years touched the hem of his garment and was healed in the same hour. And when we marvelled at the miracle which was done, he said: Who touched me? Then said we: Lord, the press of men hath touched thee. But he answered and said unto us: I perceive that a virtue is gone out of me. Straightway that woman came before him, and answered and said unto him: Lord, I touched thee. And he answered and said unto her: Go, thy faith hath made thee whole. Thereafter he made the deaf to hear and the blind to see; out of them that were possessed he cast out the unclean spirits, and cleansed the lepers. The spirit which dwelt in a man, whereof the name was Legion, cried out against Jesus, saying: Before the time of our destruction is come, thou art come to drive us out. But the Lord Jesus rebuked him, saying: Go out of this man and do him no hurt. And he entered into the swine and drowned them in the water and they were choked.

Thereafter he did walk upon the sea, and the winds blew, and he cried out against them (rebuked them), and the waves of the sea were made calm. And when we his disciples had no money, we asked him: What shall we do because of the tax-gatherer? And he answered and told us: Let one of you cast an hook into the deep, and take out a fish, and he shall find therein a penny: that give unto the tax-gatherer for me and you. And thereafter when we had no bread, but only five loaves and two fishes, he commanded the people to sit them down, and the number of them was five thousand, besides children and women. We did set pieces of bread before them, and they ate and were filled, and there remained over, and we filled twelve baskets full of the fragments, asking one another and saying: What mean these five loaves? They are the symbol of our faith in the Lord of the Christians (in the great christendom), even in the Father, the Lord Almighty, and in Jesus Christ our redeemer, in the Holy Ghost the comforter, in the holy church, and in the remission of sins.

6 These things did our Lord and Saviour reveal unto us and teach us. And we do even as he, that ye may become partakers in the grace of our Lord and in our ministry and our giving of thanks (glory), and think upon life eternal. Be ye steadfast and waver not in the knowledge and confidence of our Lord Jesus Christ, and he will have mercy on you and save you everlastingly, world without end.

The Coptic which you cite from starts immediately after this. However I think that what we have just cited is the original part of the document. Perhaps some of what comes after is authentic or can be dated to the early period. However this is the earliest strata of the text and the material has been corrupted thereafter.

Bernard Muller · 03-22-2013, 09:26 AM

to aa,

Quote:

the author of the Epistula Apostolorum invented his story that Jesus was the Angel Gabriel

Yes, you said it.

Quote:

There is NO evidence at all that the Epistula Apostolorum is an historical account of Jesus and the Apostles when it is riddled with fictitious events and contadicted by the supposed Jesus in gMark and gMatthew.

I did not say it is a true historical account. The EA was made, in part, by drawing material from earlier texts, with the usual embellishments, which are the norm for a later text using earlier ones.
Where did you get that dogma of yours that a later Christian writing cannot contradict earlier ones?

Cordially, Bernard

stephan huller · 03-22-2013, 09:27 AM

Now look carefully at the gospel citations. This is not merely random citations but an ORDERLY account of what transpired in the gospel of this community. It is a Diatessaron, the earliest Diatessaron, probably belonging to the Quartodeciman community which produced this document in the mid-second century or so.

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

03-21-2013, 10:39 PM	#671
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Bernard, Yes that seems to be true. But on another subject look at the order of the gospel numbered at the very beginning. It's a gospel harmony of some sort but I've never seen the ordering like that before. It begins with John and then goes into the Marcosian infancy narrative and then zig zags across the four gospels in a most perplexing order. What gospel is this?

03-22-2013, 09:27 AM	#680
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Now look carefully at the gospel citations. This is not merely random citations but an ORDERLY account of what transpired in the gospel of this community. It is a Diatessaron, the earliest Diatessaron, probably belonging to the Quartodeciman community which produced this document in the mid-second century or so.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.