Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Huon · 10-21-2009, 01:06 AM

Quote:

The oldest collection of the writings of St. Ignatius known to have existed was that made use of by the historian Eusebius in the first half of the fourth century, but which unfortunately is no longer extant. It was made up of the seven letters written by Ignatius whilst on his way to Rome; These letters were addressed to the Christians

• of Ephesus (Pros Ephesious);
• of Magnesia (Magnesieusin);
• of Tralles (Trallianois);
• of Rome (Pros Romaious);
• of Philadelphia (Philadelpheusin);
• of Smyrna (Smyrnaiois); and
• to Polycarp (Pros Polykarpon).

We find these seven mentioned not only by Eusebius (Church History III.36) but also by St. Jerome (De viris illust., c. xvi). Of later collections of Ignatian letters which have been preserved, the oldest is known as the "long recension". This collection, the author of which is unknown, dates from the latter part of the fourth century. It contains the seven genuine and six spurious letters, but even the genuine epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of its author. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the original form.

This quote comes from the Catholic Encyclopedia. They have no interest in denigrating their sources. The letters of Ignatius, in their present form, date from the latter part of the fourth century, and possibly they never existed before Eusebius !

The "personal views of its author" are the views of the catholic hierarchy of the end of the fourth century.

Quote:

all, in turn, have been collectively rejected, especially by the coreligionists of Calvin. The reformer himself, in language as violent as it is uncritical (Institutes, 1-3), repudiates in globo the letters which so completely discredit his own peculiar views on ecclesiastical government. The convincing evidence which the letters bear to the Divine origin of Catholic doctrine is not conducive to predisposing non-Catholic critics in their favor, in fact, it has added not a little to the heat of the controversy.

This quote comes also from the Catholic Encyclopedia.
Oh, my god !
These letters are worthless fabrications.

Roger Pearse · 10-21-2009, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Another lie. Luke-Acts is conservatively dated to 90-110 CE, after the fall of the Temple and well after Mark was written.

I don't see why Acts can date later than 61 AD. A date of AD 90 is not a "conservative" date.

Quote:

Ignatius' letters have been heavily interpolated. One cannot know exactly when those quotes were written.

The letters of Ignatius that have been transmitted to us come in a long recension and a short recension. The long is an interpolated version of the short, sometime in the 4th century, by someone with Apollinarist leanings. There is no problem with the short version.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

dog-on · 10-21-2009, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Another lie. Luke-Acts is conservatively dated to 90-110 CE, after the fall of the Temple and well after Mark was written.

I don't see why Acts can date later than 61 AD. A date of AD 90 is not a "conservative" date.

Yup, all those first century gnostics would agree.

Wait, what?

Quote:

Ignatius' letters have been heavily interpolated. One cannot know exactly when those quotes were written.

The letters of Ignatius that have been transmitted to us come in a long recension and a short recension. The long is an interpolated version of the short, sometime in the 4th century, by someone with Apollinarist leanings. There is no problem with the short version.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. :notworthy:

Huon · 10-21-2009, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catholic Encyclopedia

Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus and theologian, born at Antioch in Syria about 393; died about 457. Theodoret ("Dial. Immutab.", I, iv, 33a, Paris, 1642) is the authority for the statement that St. Peter appointed Ignatius to the See of Antioch. St. John Chrysostom lays special emphasis on the honor conferred upon the martyr in receiving his episcopal consecration at the hands of the Apostles themselves ("Hom. in St. Ig.", IV. 587). Natalis Alexander quotes Theodoret to the same effect (III, xii, art. xvi, p. 53).

So, the first "historian" which knows something about this Ignatius (don't read Ignotus, please !) is a bishop who lived after Eusebius, and three centuries after his hero.

Huon · 10-21-2009, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

The letters of Ignatius that have been transmitted to us come in a long recension and a short recension. The long is an interpolated version of the short, sometime in the 4th century, by someone with Apollinarist leanings. There is no problem with the short version.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Except that, from the catholic Encyclopedy itself, "even the genuine epistles (the short version) were greatly interpolated. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the original form".

:devil1:

Craigart14 · 10-21-2009, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Quote:

The oldest collection of the writings of St. Ignatius known to have existed was that made use of by the historian Eusebius in the first half of the fourth century, but which unfortunately is no longer extant. It was made up of the seven letters written by Ignatius whilst on his way to Rome; These letters were addressed to the Christians

• of Ephesus (Pros Ephesious);
• of Magnesia (Magnesieusin);
• of Tralles (Trallianois);
• of Rome (Pros Romaious);
• of Philadelphia (Philadelpheusin);
• of Smyrna (Smyrnaiois); and
• to Polycarp (Pros Polykarpon).

We find these seven mentioned not only by Eusebius (Church History III.36) but also by St. Jerome (De viris illust., c. xvi). Of later collections of Ignatian letters which have been preserved, the oldest is known as the "long recension". This collection, the author of which is unknown, dates from the latter part of the fourth century. It contains the seven genuine and six spurious letters, but even the genuine epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of its author. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the original form.

This quote comes from the Catholic Encyclopedia. They have no interest in denigrating their sources. The letters of Ignatius, in their present form, date from the latter part of the fourth century, and possibly they never existed before Eusebius !

The "personal views of its author" are the views of the catholic hierarchy of the end of the fourth century.

Quote:

all, in turn, have been collectively rejected, especially by the coreligionists of Calvin. The reformer himself, in language as violent as it is uncritical (Institutes, 1-3), repudiates in globo the letters which so completely discredit his own peculiar views on ecclesiastical government. The convincing evidence which the letters bear to the Divine origin of Catholic doctrine is not conducive to predisposing non-Catholic critics in their favor, in fact, it has added not a little to the heat of the controversy.

This quote comes also from the Catholic Encyclopedia.
Oh, my god !
These letters are worthless fabrications.

Thanks for this. I need to read up on the apostolic fathers. It seems to me that dating and attributing authorship for much of this material is just about impossible, but the defenders of its authenticity are absolutely certain of their "facts." The Catholic Encyclopedia is a respectable source, and I really appreciate citations that I can read for myself. Thanks again.

Sometimes I wonder if it's possible for believers to be objective in studying religious sources. I know that when I assign research papers, a number of students, against my advice, have tried to support their own church's readings of Bible books, and their usual tactic is to cite an authority without any interpretation or comment on quotations inserted in their papers. I once referred a student to Alan Dundes's book on the Bible as folklore (or via: amazon.co.uk), and the student's response was a rather indignant "why should I take one person's word" for the idea that many Biblical stories appear to be folklore? My intention was that he read Dundas and evaluate the arguments in the book, not consider Dundes a final authority. Appeals to authority are widespread in the Christian world, but not very useful as scholarship.

Craig

DCHindley · 10-21-2009, 10:06 AM

The CE is referring to the longer Greek versions of the 7 original epistles being heavily interpolated when compared to the shorter Greek versions. All you have to do is read any commentary on them to see this.

The longer Greek versions contain about 60% of the material of the shorter Greek versions (my estimation, not quantified) plus much that is not in the shorter Greek versions. So, the longer Greek versions omit some materials in the shorter Greek versions, and add materials not in the shorter Greek versions.

Now there are even shorter Syriac versions of some of these seven authentic letters, but they seem to be loose paraphrases.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

The letters of Ignatius that have been transmitted to us come in a long recension and a short recension. The long is an interpolated version of the short, sometime in the 4th century, by someone with Apollinarist leanings. There is no problem with the short version.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Except that, from the catholic Encyclopedy itself, "even the genuine epistles (the short version) were greatly interpolated. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the original form".

:devil1:

aa5874 · 10-21-2009, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigart14

If one read only the epistles and had the pre-formed notion that Jesus was mythological god - they would make absolutely no sense. Instead they only make sense in the light that Jesus was a real person."

Thoughts?

Craig

But, if one reads the epistles quite the opposite is true. Jesus is presented as a God, or an entity that rose dead, and that must have RISEN to save mankind from sin.

Let's read the epistles.

1 Corinthians 15.3-

Quote:

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures...

Romans 4:24 -

Quote:

But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead..

Ro 6:4 -

Quote:

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Romans 6:9 -

Quote:

Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.

Romans 7:4 -

Quote:

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

Romans 8:11 -

Quote:

But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

Romans 10:9 -

Quote:

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved

1Corinthians 6:14 -

Quote:

And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.

1Corinthians 15:17 -

Quote:

And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

2Co 4:14 -

Quote:

Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present us with you.

Ga 1:1 -

Quote:

Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead...

Eph 1:20 -

Quote:

Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places..

So, it is quite clear that Jesus was believed to be some kind of supernatural entity when the Epistles are read.

If Jesus was human, salvation from sin would not be possible and Paul's preaching would be in vain.

andrewcriddle · 10-21-2009, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

The letters of Ignatius that have been transmitted to us come in a long recension and a short recension. The long is an interpolated version of the short, sometime in the 4th century, by someone with Apollinarist leanings. There is no problem with the short version.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Except that, from the catholic Encyclopedy itself, "even the genuine epistles (the short version) were greatly interpolated. For this reason they are incapable of bearing witness to the original form".

:devil1:

The long version contains both totally new letters and expanded versions of the original letters. The expansion of the original epistles in the long version is so substantial that this version is incapable of bearing witness to the original form of the genuine epistles.

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle · 10-21-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catholic Encyclopedia

Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus and theologian, born at Antioch in Syria about 393; died about 457. Theodoret ("Dial. Immutab.", I, iv, 33a, Paris, 1642) is the authority for the statement that St. Peter appointed Ignatius to the See of Antioch. St. John Chrysostom lays special emphasis on the honor conferred upon the martyr in receiving his episcopal consecration at the hands of the Apostles themselves ("Hom. in St. Ig.", IV. 587). Natalis Alexander quotes Theodoret to the same effect (III, xii, art. xvi, p. 53).

So, the first "historian" which knows something about this Ignatius (don't read Ignotus, please !) is a bishop who lived after Eusebius, and three centuries after his hero.

There is an earlier tradition found in Eusebius and probably going back to Julius Africanus; in which Evodius was appointed by the apostles and succeeded by Ignatius.

The idea of Ignatius as directly appointed by the Apostles seems to be a later legend.

Andrew Criddle

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.