DCHindley

Andrew & Spin (in alphabetical order),

I noticed that the story of Matthew 2 and the account in Ignatius Ephesians 19 seems to also be related to Revelation 12.

Ignatius 19:2 describes the star as dazzling with a fantastic heavenly show, which corresponds more to Rev 12:1 than relatively plain description in Matt 2:2.

In Ignatius Eph 19:1 & 3, this display is explained as a kind of grand premier of God's plan, formerly unrecognized by the prince of this world, to abolish death by appearing in the flesh by means of birth from a virgin and dying "unto newness of everlasting life."

These themes are described in much more detail in Rev 12 & Mat 2.

The woman of Rev 12 is with child and about to bear is clearly the same as Mary wife of Joseph, in Mat 2. Note Mat makes the point that this baby was conceived through no human agency, which corresponds to Ignatius' "virginity of Mary" (19:1b). The bearing of a a child is in 19:1:c.

The dragon of Rev 12, with 7 heads with crowns and 10 horns, the devil/Satan, might relate to Herod the Great as his instrument of evil (the 7 heads represent the following princes derived from his line - Antipater III, Alexander, Aristobolus IV, Herod Philip, Herod Archelaus, Herod Antipas, Philip, Herod of Chalcis, Agrippa I & Marcus Julius Agrippa II, and the 10 horns represent Herod's 5 wives: the Idumean Doris, the Hasmonean Miriamme, Mariamme II, the Samaritan Malthace, and Cleopatra of Jerusalem, plus 5 of the 6 offspring of these wives: Salampsio, Cyprus III, Herodias, Berenice II, Drusilla & Salome II). The devil, of course, would correspond to Ignatuis' "prince of this world" (19:1a)

In Mat 2:16, Herod goes to Mary in an attempt to kill her offspring. This corresponds to Rev 12:3 end.

In Rev 12:6 & 14, the woman is carried away to "the wilderness" to be sheltered for a set period of time. In Mat 2 she is carried away to Egypt, where she stays until Herod dies.

In Rev 12:5, the woman's son is carried off to God, which I suppose is an oblique reference to Jesus' resurrection, which in Matthew occurs at the end of the book. This would correspond to Ignatuis' "death of the lord" (19:1d, at least by the trope of synecdoche).

Finally, the "perplexity to know whence came this strange appearance" (Ig.Eph.19:2) corresponds to "When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him" (Matt 2:3). There is no passage in Rev 12 corresponding to this perplexity.

It seems that all three of these texts tell the same story in three different ways. There are overlaps in some details, but none of them are strong evidence to suggest direct dependence one from another.

These points of overlap could indicate real events were interpreted against a common myth by three different authors.

DCH

Ignatius to the Ephesians 19:

1a And hidden from the prince of this world were

1b the virginity of Mary

1c and her child-bearing

1d and likewise also the death of the Lord

1e --three mysteries to be cried aloud--yet which were wrought in the silence of God. How then were they made manifest to the ages?

2a A star shone forth in the heaven above all the stars;

2b and its light was unutterable,

2c and its strangeness caused amazement;

2d and all the rest of the constellations with the sun and moon formed themselves into a chorus about the star;

2e but the star itself far outshone them all;

2f and there was perplexity to know whence came this strange appearance which was so unlike them.

3a From that time forward every sorcery and every spell was dissolved,

3b the ignorance of wickedness vanished away,

3c the ancient kingdom was pulled down,

3d when God appeared in the likeness of man unto newness of everlasting life;

3e and that which had been perfected in the counsels of God began to take effect.

3f Thence all things were perturbed, because the abolishing of death was taken in hand.

Revelation 12 (there appears to be a mixing of sources, one referring to events in the heavens and the other referring to evants on earth, with similarly described principal characters):

1a And a great portent appeared in heaven,

1b a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars;

2 she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.

3a And another portent appeared in heaven;

3b behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads.

4a His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth.

4b And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, that he might devour her child when she brought it forth;

5a she brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron,

5b but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,

6a and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God,

6b in which to be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days.

7 Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, 8 but they were defeated and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.

9 And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world -- he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

10a And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, "Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come,

10b for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God.

11 And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death.

12a Rejoice then, O heaven and you that dwell therein!

12b But woe to you, O earth and sea,

12c for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because he knows that his time is short!"

13 And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had borne the male child.

14a But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle that she might fly from the serpent into the wilderness,

14b to the place where she is to be nourished for a time, and times, and half a time.

15 The serpent poured water like a river out of his mouth after the woman, to sweep her away with the flood.

16 But the earth came to the help of the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the river which the dragon had poured from his mouth.

17a Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring,

17b on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus.

17c And he stood on the sand of the sea.

Matthew 2:

1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king,

behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, saying, 2 "Where is he who has been born king of the Jews?

For we have seen his star in the East, and have come to worship him."

3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him;

4 and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. 5a They told him, "In Bethlehem of Judea;

5b for so it is written by the prophet: 6 'And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who will govern my people Israel.'"

7 Then Herod summoned the wise men secretly and ascertained from them what time the star appeared;

8 and he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, "Go and search diligently for the child, and when you have found him bring me word, that I too may come and worship him."

9a When they had heard the king they went their way;

9b and lo, the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came to rest over the place where the child was.

10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy;

11a and going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him.

11b Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.

12 And being warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed to their own country by another way.

13 Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there till I tell you; for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him."

14 And he rose and took the child and his mother by night, and departed to Egypt, 15a and remained there until the death of Herod.

15b This was to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, "Out of Egypt have I called my son."

16 Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, was in a furious rage, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time which he had ascertained from the wise men.

17 Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah: 18 "A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled, because they were no more."

19 But when Herod died, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying, 20 "Rise, take the child and his mother, and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the child's life are dead."

21 And he rose and took the child and his mother, and went to the land of Israel.

22a But when he heard that Archelaus reigned over Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there,

22b and being warned in a dream he withdrew to the district of Galilee.

23a And he went and dwelt in a city called Nazareth,

23b that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazarene."

spin

There is nothing rare about the verb ταρασσω. The Liddell & Scott entry is quite large. Even Jesus is perplexed (εταραχθη) in Jn 13:21; Zachariah (Lk 1:12) is perplexed to see an angel. Stars were much more influential in the classical period. We have the word "disaster" in English because of the ancient effects of stars. The claim that strange stars can't perplex people in any culture would be hard to demonstrate, wouldn't you think? Perhaps you could provide some evidence for the relative rarity of the combination. As is, I find your claim unbelievable.

So the star in Ignatius is not the star in Matthew, but the magi? Aren't you pulling the rug out from underneath your own argument?

I didn't talk of anything suggesting a "pre-Matthew". I was dealing with a tradition, passed in fragments by word of mouth. Wandering preachers find ways of telling their stories to have impact, adding new elements received from people they communed with in their travels. At any stage no two communities are likely to be bearers of the exact same tradition.

And I'm arguing that you have no basis to make such an argument.

But imagine you were able to convince people that you were correct: then you would have enlarged the tradition.


spin

Voice of reason

Solar myth is how it began.

spin

Solar myth indeed. That's not very clear--either how it could have begun or how you can know. A little more explanation would be good, eg which solar myth, and how such things got entangled with a Jewish context. Is this view any different from the developing oral traditions of the nascent religion with the added a priori view that a major source was some unspecified solar myth?


spin

aa5874

It is really extremely difficult to show or even contemplate that some unknown pre-Matthew is unlikely to be independent of Mark when gMark presently contains no birth narrative, nothing about the Magi and the star.

Now, Justin Martyr and even Origen do seem to confirm that there was a Gospel that stated Jesus was born in a CAVE .

None of the extant Gospels contain the CAVE birth.

It can be argued that the "Memoirs of the Apostles" predated today's gMatthew and was indepedent of gMark for its CAVE birth narrative.

"Dialogue with Trypho" LXXVIII And "Contra Celsus" 1.51 The Gospel by the disciples, the "Memoirs of the Apostles" were BEFORE the birth narrative in gMatthew and was independent of gMark.

JoeWallack

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.ii.xix.html

JW:
It ain't no Mystries
whether it's politics, religion or histries.
The thing you gotta know iz,
Everything is show biz.

From the 1st century hit - The Soul Producers

JW:
Probably? I think you probably need to be able to coOrdinate the supposed Internal evidence with the External before you use this word. I confess though that you are probably much better at thinking like the Fathers than we Skeptics here.

I will now reveal to the Unfaithful here 3 mysteries which cast doubt from above on your use of the offending word:

1) It's been demonstrated Ad Nazorean that Ignatius in general is full of ...forgery. "Short/Long recension" could be a clue. In an Irony that I think the author of "Mark" would have really appreciated, Wallack's Rule says that the older a Christian writing is the more likely it is to contain forgery. The historical Ignatius could be earlier than the evidence you see/want/need.

2) Ignatius' obsession with Mary

All the Guys Idolized Her

looks paralleled to:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...s-roberts.html

The Protoevangelium of James

which is generally dated mid 2nd century suggesting (as opposed to creating probability) that while this info from Ignatius is post "Matthew" it may not have "Matthew" as a main/any source. I really shouldn't write this but I just can't help myself. With apologies to aa the "cave" of Justin and Celsus is probably coming from this.

3) And the "cruncher" as you Brits say. You've already retreated to a source for "Matthew" as the source for Ignatius. But why put up a defensive line there? We have evidence that the supposed virgin birth is not original to "Matthew". Brown El-all thinks it's not original, The Ebionites apparently did not have it and "Marcion's Gospel did not either. Oh yeah, "Matthew's" source, "Mark" did not have it either. So if Ignatius refers to elements of a miraculous birth is that evidence of being written before or after "Matthew" (original "Matthew" that is)?



Joseph

ErrancyWiki

aa5874

Your probability is perhaps close to zero. You cannot show that Justin Marty or Origen was aware of The Protoevangelium of James .

Justin Martyr did NOT even mention that he was aware that there was such a writing called The Protoevangelium of James in all his writings and mentioned the "Memoirs of the Apostles" and that it was read in the churches on Sundays.

The law of probability suggests that it is more probable, more likely, that Justin Martyr used the "Memoirs of the Apostles" for his CAVE birth than The Protoevangelium of James .


Origen in "Against Celsus" did not write about the The Protoevangelium of James or did not state that any James wrote a Gospel with a CAVE birth story but he did state that the CAVE birth story can be found in the Gospel of the disciples.

It is more probable that Origen used the Gospel of the disciples for the CAVE birth story.


But, what is siginificant is that the details found in The Protoevangelium of James were not used by any authors of the Gospels, the Epistles, Justin and Origen.

Examine this detail in The Protoevangelium of James about Mary that no Gospels, no Epistles and neither Justin Martyr nor Origen in "Against Celsus" mentioned.


It is highly probable that The Protoevangelium of James was a late writing and AFTER "Against Celsus".

Now, the authorship and actual date of writing is not really known and is most likely a forgery. It most probable that the supposed apostle called James could not have written The Proteoevangelium of James

andrewcriddle

Hi spin

Loking into it the word-group is somewhat more common than I thought but not that common. The passage in to the Ephesians seems to be the only usage of this group of words in all Ignatius' work. (Don't rely on this claim, it is based on my attempt to check Ignatius by hand and may not be right.)

Can you provide other examples from the ancient world of people being perplexed/disturbed (ταρασσω) by a star ?

Andrew Criddle

andrewcriddle

I will take this as a compliment. Thank you.

Andrew Criddle

spin

How often does Ignatius talk about stars? (Hint: you've read it.)

This is naughty. You're supposed to be substantiating your claim rather than asking me to disprove it.


spin