|
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
|
Arius of Alexandria and Leucius Charinus are one in the same author
Dear Ancient Historians,
The mystery of the origins of the christian religion will become clear when it is recognised that Arius of Alexandria and Leucius Charinus (the disciple of the devil) are one and the same historical author.
Many of you think you know who Arius of Alexandria was. Eusebius and his ecclesiatical history continuators describe Arius as a variant christian. The writings of Arius were edicted for destruction by Constantine, who is supected of having Arius poisoned, and nothing much survives. We have a few letters etc however the very fact that these letters were preserved by the same regime which opposed Arius and Arianism should counsel any objective assessment to treat these with great circumspect. We have the words of Arius (a series of five short sayings which we are all very familiar with now I hope) presrved not just by two late "ecclesiatical historians" almost 100 years after the event of Nicaea, but those same short sayings also preserved in the record of the public opinion that fourth and fifth christian bishop gatherings pronounced anathemas over. The words of Arius --- these same simpe phrases -- were preserved by the people of the empire for hundreds of years in violent opposition and resistance against christianity.
Now what do we know of the shadowy author whom the "church fathers" refer to as Leucius Charinus - the disciple of the devil? This author did not write the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. Leutius Charinus is not known and named for his authorship of anything canonical. He is supposed to be the author who wrote the first five --- thought to be the earliest five --- of the new testament non canonical texts. Why dont we talk about this author Mr. Leucius Charinus?
He apparently wrote these texts (at least):
The Acts of John
The Acts of Peter
The Acts of Paul
The Acts of Andrew
The Acts of Thomas
Do these have any relevance to BC&H?
Best wishes,
Pete
PS: The following mainstream review and summary is sourced from this page
Quote:
The Shadowy Leucius Charinus and his "Leucian Acts"
The Shadowy Leucius Charinus
Leucius, called Leucius Charinus by the Patriarch Photios I of Constantinople in the ninth century, is the name applied to a cycle of what M. R. James termed "Apostolic romances"[1] that seem to have had wide currency long before a selection were read aloud at the Second Council of Nicaea (787) and rejected. Leucius is not among the early heretical teachers mentioned by name in Irenaeus' Adversus haereses (ca. 180), but wonder tales of miraculous Acts in some form were already in circulation in the second century.[2] None of the surviving manuscripts are as early as that.
The fullest account of Leucius is that given by Photius (Codex 114), who describes a book, called The Circuits of the Apostles, which contained the Acts of Peter, John, Andrew, Thomas, and Paul, that was purported to have been written by "Leucius Charinus" which he judged full of folly, self-contradiction, falsehood, and impiety (Wace); Photius is the only source to give his second name, "Charinus". Epiphanius (Haer. 51.427) made of Leucius a disciple of John who joined his master in opposing the Ebionites, a characterization that appears unlikely, since other patristic writers agree that the cycle attributed to him was Docetist, denying the humanity of Christ. Augustine knew the cycle, which he attributed to "Leutius", which his adversary Faustus thought had been wrongly excluded from the New Testament canon by the Catholics. Gregory of Tours found a copy of the Acts of Andrew from the cycle and made an epitome of it, omitting the "tiresome" elaborations of detail he found in it.
The "Leucian Acts" are as follows:
The Acts of John
The Acts of Peter
The Acts of Paul
The Acts of Andrew
The Acts of Thomas
The Leucian Acts were most likely redacted at a later date to express a more orthodox view. Of the five, the Acts of John and Thomas have the most remaining Gnostic content.
Notes: [1] M.R. James, introduction to the Acts of Andrew,
The Apocryphal New Testament Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924.
[2] See Acts of Paul and Thecla.
Summary of the "Leucian Acts" - Paul N. Tobin (Rejection of Pascal's Wager).
Brief Overview Summary of the "Leucian Acts"
During the period spanning roughly 150-250 CE, five apocryphal acts were written. These were The Acts of Peter, The Acts of John, The Acts of Andrew, The Acts of Thomas and The Acts of Paul. These are all works written chiefly to entertain, to instruct and to spread Christian propaganda. Very little in these works can be considered historical. [21]
The Acts of Peter is preserved today only in scattered fragments in various languages. That the work is largely a fictional invention can be seen from its obsession with virginity and morbid hatred of sex-a trend that was developing during the time it was written. However it does seem to preserve some authentic tradition of Peter's martyrdom in Rome. According to this work, Peter was crucified on an upside down cross during the persecution of Nero. [22]
The Acts of John is of little historical value since it confused the John the seer of Revelation with the apostle John. [23] John the son of Zebedee is some sort of an enigma. Tradition from late second century (Ireneaus [c130-c200] and Clement of Alexandria [c150-c215]) asserted that John died in Ephesus during the reign of Trajan which would put his death around the year 98 to 117. [24] There is an alternate tradition however, that placed his death very early; stating that he was martyred, together with his brother James, in 44 CE. [25]
The Acts of Andrew is another work of Christian fiction. It story of Andrew's martyrdom in Patras Greece is generally considered unhistorical. The tradition that he was crucified on an X-shaped cross (St. Andrew's Cross) is based on an even later tradition; around the thirteenth century. [26]
The Acts of Thomas narrates the story of Thomas' mission to India. Some scholars, about a century ago, argued for this historicity of this Acts due to mention of an actual Indian King, Gundaphorus in the work. [27] However this view is no longer held today. The presence of the reference to actual historical personae is due to the fact that during the time the Acts of Thomas was written, there was a lively commercial and cultural exchange between Edessa, where the Acts was composed, and India. Thus there was ample opportunity for the author to pick up historical details to weave into his narrative. [28] One of the main reason why the Acts of Thomas is considered unhistorical is due to the presence of late Gnostic, Mandean and Manichean influence in the work. [29] [e]
Eusebius:
It should be recalled that Eusebius (c260-c340) was the ecclesiastical historian of early Christianity. He had access to the vast library of early Christian works at Caesarea which he cited and quoted extensively in this book. Yet when it comes to the subsequent career of the apostles, all he could muster was the same four names as the apocryphal Acts: Thomas, Andrew, John and Peter! Furthermore he gave no indication that his list was incomplete or that it was merely an excerpt. [30]
Subsequent Apocryphal literature:
After the publication of these five apocryphal Acts, the next generations of Christian hagiographers concocted even more grotesque and less believable Acts. There were Acts of Philip, Acts of Peter and Andrew, The Martyrdom of Matthew, The Acts of Andrew and Bartholomew and so on. Schneelmacher's New Testament Apocrypha Volume II l isted forty of such works. These works were mainly expansions of the original five apocryphal Acts with no historical value. [31] Needless to say, the traditions regarding the later ministries of the "shadowy" apostles are late and extremely unreliable. For instance, the apostle Matthew was supposed to have been martyred (according to different traditions) in Ethiopia, Persia and Pontus! [32] Like Matthew, Bartholomew also managed to die multiple deaths of martyrdom. He was supposed to have been martyred in India and in Armenia. Contradictory, late and unreliable traditions exist about all the apostles. [33] History knows nothing about them.
NOTES:
21. Goodspeed, op. cit: p146, 163 Scneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha Vol II: p78-83
22. Goodspeed, op. cit.: p157 Perkins, Peter, Apostle for the Whole Church: p141-144
Riedel et.al., The Book of the Bible: p431
23. Goodspeed, op. cit.: p152
24. Eusebius: History of the Church: 3:23 & notes p380
25. Craveri, The Life of Jesus: p152
26. Eusebius: History of the Church: notes p344
Livingstone, Dictionary of the Christian Church: p20
Riedel et.al., The Book of the Bible: p433
27. Streeter, The Primitive Church: p29-30
28. Scneemelcher, op. cit: p325
29. Goodspeed, op. cit.: p158
30. Scneemelcher, op. cit.: p19
31. Goodspeed, op. cit.: p163-164 Scneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha Vol II: p426
32. Riedel, op. cit.: p437
33. Brownrigg op. cit: 42 Ferguson, Encyclopedia of Early Christianity: p168
Comparitive review of scholarship on the "Leucian Acts"
Acts of John
István Czachesz:
Recent opinions about the date and provenance of the Acts of John largely differ. Junod and Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, pp. 692ff and Histoire, p. 4, suggest the second half of the second century in Egypt; Schäferdiek, "Acts of John", pp. 166f, the first half of the third century in East Syria; Lalleman, Acts of John, pp. 244-70, the second quarter of the second century in Asia Minor. Recently Bremmer,"Apocryphal Acts" (Printed Resources ), pp. 158f, confirmed Asia Minor as a place of origin and suggested c. 150 as the date of writing (pp. 153f). Cf. Czachesz, Apostolic Commission, pp. 117f. Chapters 94-102 and 109 probably were added later, cf. Junod and Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, pp. 700ff and Histoire , p. 4; Lalleman, Acts of John, pp. 59-66 and 266ff; Luttikhuizen, "Gnostic Reading". For the reconstruction of the text, see Czachesz, Apostolic Commission, pp. 91-96.
Geoff Trowbridge: The Acts of John (c. 150-200 C.E.) were once believed to be the earliest of the Apocryphal Acts, though much of its gnostic idealogy is not found in the other acts (except Thomas). Many scholars believe the blatantly gnostic and/or docetic chapters (94-102 and 109) are a later addition. The original author is traditionally believed to be Leucius Charinus, a companion of John who was later associated with the Manichaeans. The book tells of John's two journeys to Ephesus, during which he performs several ressurections and converts the followers of Artemis after destroying their temple. The book also includes the "Hymn of Christ," used in a modern musical work by Gustav Holst. Like the Johannine gospel, the Christology of the Acts shows some Hellenistic influence. Because the Acts of John were condemned particularly early in their history, all the surviving texts are fragmentary. The earliest manuscripts are Greek, though many Latin texts show later developments and may have suffered from Catholic attempts to purge the unorthodox passages.
Glenn Davis:
Acts of John (Ephesus, 150-200 CE) purports to give an eyewitness account of the missionary work of the apostle John in and around Ephesus; it may therefore be of Ephesian provenance. It probably dates to the 2nd half of the 2nd century. Although no complete text is extant, we have considerable portions in Greek and in Latin. The Stichometry of Nicephorus gives its length as 2500 lines, the same number as for the Gospel according to Matthew. An English translation is in [Schneemelcher] v. 2 pp. 172-212. The author of the Acts of John, said to be Leucius, a real or fictitious companion of the apostle John, narrates his miracles, sermons, and death. The sermons display unmistakable Docetic tendencies, especially in the description of Jesus and the immateriality of his body:
.... Sometimes when I meant to touch him [Jesus], I met with a material and solid body; but at other times when I felt him, his substance was immaterial and incorporeal, as if it did not exist at all ... And I often wished, as I walked with him, to see his footprint, whether it appeared on the ground (for I saw him as it were raised up from the earth), and I never saw it. (§ 93)
The author also relates that Jesus was constantly changing shape, appearing sometimes as a small boy, sometimes as a beautiful man; sometimes bald-headed with a long beard, sometimes as a youth with a pubescent beard (§ 87-89). The book includes a long hymn (§ 94-96), which no doubt was once used as a liturgical song (with response) in some Johannine communities. Before he goes to die, Jesus gathers his apostles in a circle, and, while holding one another's hands as they circle in a dance around him, he sings a hymn to the Father. The terminology of the hymn is closely related to that of the Johannine Gospel, especially its prologue. At the same time, the author gives the whole a Docetic cast. Besides presenting theologically-oriented teaching, the author knows how to spin strange and entertaining stories. There is for example, the lengthy account of the devout Drusiana and her ardent lover Callimachus in a sepulchre (§ 63-86), which was no doubt intended to provide Christians with an alternative to the widely-read libidinous story of the Ephesian widow and the guard at her late husband's tomb. For a lighter touch the author entertains his readers with the droll incident of the bedbugs (§ 60-61). Although the Acts of John is without importance for the historical Jesus and the apostle John, it is nevertheless valuable for tracing the development of popular Christianity. It is, for example, the oldest source recording the celebration of the Eucharist for the dead (§ 72). The Acts of John may have been composed by a member of the Hellenistic cultivated classes, who drew upon various literary genuses and in so doing, without any specific attachment to a concrete community, sought to propagate a Christianity as he understood it, as the expression of certain aspirations of a philosophical attitude to the world which he had held even before his conversion.
Acts of Peter
Geoff Trowbridge:
The Acts Of Peter (c. 150-200 C.E.) are generally regarded as the first of the apocryphal Acts, though scholars have previously argued for priority of John's or occasionally Paul's Acts. Modern scholarship tends to agree that Paul uses Peter, while Peter and John share a common origin. Authorship has thus been credited to Leucius, the companion of John who is also credited with the Acts of John. The surviving manuscripts are a long Latin text from Vercelli dating to the sixth century which comprises most of the Acts, and an earlier Greek text containing only the martyrdom, from which we derive the tradition that Peter was crucified upside-down. There are also secondary texts which contain parallel stories on the rather unpleasant theme of women welcoming paralysis rather than defiling their bodies with sexual relations. In a Coptic text included with the Nag Hammadi library, the female in question is Peter's daughter. Ironically, despite these encratite views of sex and marriage, much of the Acts of Peter are spent denouncing the gnostic teacher Simon Magus who undoubtedly shared the same views. The Acts of Peter were judged as heretical by Eusebius and the Gelasian Decree. Peter performs many miracles in the Acts, from talking dogs and infants to the resurrection of both people and smoked fish. Rome is the primary setting, and possibly the place of authorship.
M.R. James:
From "The Apocryphal New Testament", Translation and Notes, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924. Written, probably by a resident in Asia Minor (he does not know much about Rome), not later than A. D. 200, in Greek. The author has read the Acts of John very carefully, and modelled his language upon them. However, he was not so unorthodox as Leucius, though his language about the Person of our Lord (ch. xx) has rather suspicious resemblances to that of the Acts of John. The length of the book as given by the Stichometry of Nicephorus was 2,750 lines-fifty lines less than the canonical Acts. The portions we have may be about the length of St. Mark's Gospel; and about 1,000 lines may be wanting. Such is Zaha's estimate. We have:
1. A short episode in Coptic. - This is preserved separately in an early papyrus manuscript (fourth-fifth century) now at Berlin; the other contents of it are Gnostic writings which have not yet been published. I follow C. Schmidt's rendering of it. It has a title at the end: The Act of Peter. See the separate article The Act of Peter.
2. A large portion in Latin preserved in a single manuscript of the seventh century at Vercelli: often called the Vercelli Acts. It includes the martyrdom.
3. The martyrdom, preserved separately, in two good Greek copies, in Latin, and in many versions-Coptic, Slavonic, Syriac, Armenian, Arabic, Ethiopic.
4. One or two important quotations from lost portions; a small fragment of the original in a papyrus; certain passages-speeches of Peter- transferred by an unscrupulous writer to the Life of St. Abercius of Hierapolis.
5. A Latin paraphrase of the martyrdom, attributed to Linus, Peter's successor in the bishopric of Rome, was made from the Greek, and is occasionally useful.
Robert F. Stoops:
writes (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 5, p. 267): One of the earliest of the apocryphal acts of the apostles, the Acts of Peter reports a miracle contest between Simon Magus and the apostle Peter in Rome. It concludes with Peter's martyrdom. The Acts of Peter was originally composed in Greek during the second half of the 2d century, probably in Asia Minor. The majority of the text has survived only in the Latin translation of the Vercelli manuscript. The concluding chapters are preserved separately as the Martyrdom of Peter in three Greek manuscripts and in Coptic (fragmentary), Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, Armenian, and Slavonic versions.
Wikipedia: One of the earliest of the apocryphal acts of the apostles, the Acts of Peter reports a miracle contest between Simon Magus and the apostle Simon Peter in Rome. The majority of the text has survived only in the Latin translation of the Vercelli manuscript. The Acts of Peter was originally composed in Greek during the second half of the 2nd century, probably in Asia Minor. Consensus amongst academics points to it being based on the Acts of John, and traditionally both that and this work were said to be written by Leucius Charinus, whom Epiphanius identifies as the companion of John. In the text Peter performs miracles such as resurrecting smoked fish, and making dogs talk. The text condemns Simon Magus, a senior figure associated with gnosticism, who appears to have concerned the writer of the text greatly. Some versions give accounts of stories on the theme of a woman/women who prefer paralysis to sex, sometimes, including in a version from the Berlin Codex, the woman is the daughter of Peter. It concludes describing Peter's martyrdom as upside-down crucifixion, a tradition that is first attested in this work. These concluding chapters are preserved separately as the Martyrdom of Peter in three Greek manuscripts and in Coptic (fragmentary), Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, Armenian, and Slavonic versions. Because of this, it is sometimes proposed that the martyrdom account was the original text to which the preceding chapters were affixed.
Acts of Paul
Glenn Davis:
The Acts of Paul (Asia Minor, 185-195 CE) is a romance that makes arbitrary use of the canonical Acts and the Pauline Epistles. Many manuscripts have survived, there is an English translation in [Schneemelcher] v. 2 pp. 237-265, but there is not yet a critical edition. The canon list in the 6th century codex Claromontanus includes it with an indication that it contains 3560 lines, somewhat longer than the canonical Acts with 2600 lines. The author, so Tertullian tells us, was a cleric who lived in the Roman province of Asia in the western part of Asia Minor, and who composed the book about 170 CE with the avowed intent of doing honor to the Apostle Paul. Although well-intentioned, the author was brought up for trial by his peers and, being convicted of falsifying the facts, was dismissed from his office. But his book, though condemned by ecclesiastical leaders, achieved considerable popularity among the laity. Certain episodes in the Acts of Paul, such as the 'Journeys of Paul and Thecla', exist in a number of Greek manuscripts and in half a dozen ancient versions. Thecla was a noble-born virgin from Iconium and an enthusiastic follower of the Apostle; she preached like a missionary and administered baptism. It was the administration of baptism by a woman that scandalized Tertullian and led him to condemn the entire book. In this section 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.
Geoff Trowbridge:
The Acts Of Paul (c. 150-200 C.E.) were by far the most popular of the apocryphal acts, spawning a great deal of Christian art and secondary literature, as well as a cult which venerated Thecla, the young girl who accompanies Paul on his missionary journeys. The Acts were considered orthodox by Hippolytus, as well as other writers as late as the mid-fourth century, but were eventually rejected by the church when heretical groups like the Manichaeans began to adopt them. Still, some late Greek texts of the Epistles to Timothy contain alternate passages that appear to be derived from the Acts. The Acts of Paul were often coupled with the Third Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, which was regarded as authentically Pauline by the Syrian and Armenian churches. Originally a separate work, it was likely written around the time of the pastoral epistles and conjoined with the later Acts only after it had been excluded from most Pauline collections. The letter was written primarily to combat Gnostic and Marcionite doctrine which utilized other Pauline works for anti-semitic means. This epistle has survived in several extant manuscripts, as have the stories of Thecla and the account of Paul's beheading in Rome; the remainder of the Acts exist only in fragmentary Greek texts from the third century, and Coptic texts from the fifth. The author, who is unknown, does not appear to show any dependence upon the canonical Acts, instead utilizing other oral traditions of Paul's preaching and missionary work. He likely wrote in Asia Minor near the end of the second century.
Philip Sellew
(The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 5, p. 202) writes: A 2nd-century Christian writing recounting the missionary career and death of the apostle Paul and classed among the NT Apocrypha. In this work Paul is pictured as traveling from city to city, converting gentiles and proclaiming the need for a life of sexual abstinence and other encratite practices. Though ancient evidence suggests that the Acts of Paul was a relatively lengthy work (3600 lines according to the Stichometry of Nicephorus), only about two-thirds of that amount still survives. Individual sections were transmitted separately by the medieval manuscript tradition (Lipsius 1891), most importantly by the Acts of Paul and Thekla and the Martyrdom of Paul, both extant in the original Greek and several ancient translations. Manuscript discoveries in the last century have added considerable additional material. The most important of these include a Greek papyrus of the late 3d century, now at Hamburg (10 pages), a Coptic papyrus of the 4th or 5th century, now at Heidelberg (about 80 pages), and a Greek papyrus of correspondence between Paul and the Corinthians (3 Corinthians = Testuz 1959), now at Geneva. These finds have confirmed that the Thekla cycle and story of Paul's martyrdom were originally part of the larger Acts of Paul (details in Bovon 1981 or NTApocr.).
Acts of Andrew
Glenn Davis:
The oldest direct mention of the Acts of Andrew (150-200 CE) is by Eusebius who lists it among the writings that are written by heretics and are absurd and impious. The Coptic Papyrus Utrecht I, which contains a translation of a section from the Acts of Andrew, confirms that it was known in Egypt in the 4th century (the papyrus is dated to this period). In his Panarion Epiphanius reports that the writing was used by the Encratites, the Apostolici, and the Origenists. The Acts of Andrew was probably written in the second half of the 2nd century. The place of origin is unknown. Between the 3rd and the 9th century it became known and read everywhere, in Africa, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Armenia, Asia Minor, Greece, Italy, Gaul, and Spain. It was particularly successful in circles of a dualistic and ascetic tendency, especially among the Manicheans and Priscillianists. It was condemned in the Decretum Gelasianum, but this did not result in its disappearance. Rather it lived on in the form of revisions and extracts. The trail vanishes in the West in the 6th century, in the East in the 9th. The Acts of Andrew has not come down to us in the primary form of their original Greek text. The English translation in [Schneemelcher] v. 2 pp. 118-151 is taken from these witnesses: Liber de miraculis by Gregory of Tours complete except for suppressed speeches; P. Utrech 1 (Coptic) corresponds to c. 18 of the previous work; Armenian Martyrdom final part; 5 Greek recensions final part; Extracts handed down in Greek various fragments.
Geoff Trowbridge:
The Acts of Andrew (c. 200-225 C.E.) continue the encratite traditions begun in the Acts of Peter and John, and might well be by the same author, though scholars tend to date Andrew slightly later. However, these Acts are not as clearly Gnostic as, for example, the Acts of John; The importance of martyrdom is stressed throughout, which is not in line with Gnostic philosophy. The Greek proconsul Aegeates sentences Andrew to be crucified after his wife refuses his sexual advances following her conversion to Christianity. Andrew survives on the cross for four days, all the while refusing the attempts by his followers to rescue him. Surviving texts range from a Coptic fragment as early as the fourth century to Greek and Latin texts from the twelfth, and it is difficult to determine which represent the original Acts. Some secondary texts claim Andrew to have evangelized Scythia rather than Greece.
Jean-Marc Prieur:
(The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 1, p. 246): writes ... The Manichean Psalter, which contains some allusions to the content of Acts Andr. (Allberry 1938: 142, 143, 192), establishes the 3d century as the terminus ad quem for the redaction of the apocryphon, but the Acts had to have originated earlier, between 150 and 200, closer to 150 than to 200. The distinctive christology of the text, its silence concerning the historical and biblical Jesus, and its distance from later institutional organization and ecclesiastical rites militate for an early dating. Moreover, its serene tone and unawareness of any polemic against some of its ideas as heterodox, particularly in the area of christology, show that it derived from a period when the christology of the Great Church had not yet taken firm shape. One might repeat here the line of argumentation employed by Junod and Kaestli for locating the Acts of John in the same period (1983: 695). Moreover, Acts John displays several affinities with Acts Andr., such as the literary genre, structure, and theological orientations.
Robert Lamberton
(Washington University) reviewing the book by D. R. Macdonald, Christianizing Homer, the Odyssey, Plato, and The Acts of Andrew. New York: Oxford, University Press, 1994. ISBN 0-19-508722-4. Extracted from Bryn Mawr Classical Review 94.10.19:
The Christian appropriation of Greek polytheist culture in the second century of the common era was, on the whole, not a pretty sight. The principal players were ham-fisted, self-styled philosophers of the order of Justin Martyr and Tertullian, whose claims to teach philosophy amounted to little more than the eviction of the traditions of Greek philosophy from what they defined as the search for truth, and their replacement by a monotonous, scriptural rhetoric, professions of faith, and such inane and ultimately useless equations as "Christ is the logos". Few and far between are the Christian texts that bear witness to any depth of knowledge of polytheist texts, whether philosophical or literary. All in all, the century and a half between the day Paul quoted Aratus to the Areopagites and the time of the confrontations with Greek tradition of the scholarly Alexandrians Clement and Origen offer little to suggest that the nascent Church found time to read the classics or put on a veneer of culture. It appropriated what it could and trampled the rest -- the bulk of the demon-ridden culture of its paranoid vision -- into the mire. The texts of the period are grim and shrill, and even when we reach the richer cultural atmosphere of Alexandria and the higher intellectual standards of Clement and Origen, we search in vain for genuinely protreptic texts, seductive texts that attract rather than proselytize, invite imaginative and intellectual engagement, rather than belabor the all-too-familiar threats, warnings, and injunctions. There is little to give the lie to Lucian's description of his Christian contemporaries: benighted, gullible "poor bastards (kakodaimones) who've convinced themselves that they're going to live forever" (Peregrinus 13). They seem to have been the sworn enemies of any possible pleasure of the text. They generated what is surely the most unsympathetic, in-your-face literature in the Western tradition.
Dennis Ronald MacDonald has been working for some years on a text that goes far to counteract this picture. If the lost original of the apocryphal Acts of Andrew was anything like what he claims it was, and if it was in fact composed in late-second-century Alexandria, then we will simply have to acknowledge that a second-century Christian could and did produce a tale of wit, fantasy, and sophistication, weaving into it themes, motifs, and whole episodes from Homer and Plato and "transvaluing" them into a Christian romance, a deliberate and self-proclaiming fiction of a richly rewarding sort. In his new book, MacDonald presents his reasons for believing that the Acts of Andrew was such a text. I have serious doubts about a great deal of what he claims, but beyond the range of my scepticism enough remains in his arguments to make this an important book that anyone concerned with the literature of the high Empire should read.
Let us first be clear about what we are dealing with here. The New Testament apocrypha as a whole are a textual critic's nightmare, and the text known as the Acts of Andrew (the brother of Paul, an obscure figure in the canonical NT, but in the apocrypha designated apostle to Achaea) has not been seen intact since the ninth century. By that time, versions of it were in circulation in Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Latin, representing states of Andrew's story that predate the surviving Byzantine Greek versions. Especially important to all reconstructions of the original is the Latin epitome composed ca. 593 by St. Gregory of Tours (Miracula sancti Andreae). The task of collating all of this material was undertaken by Joseph Flamion early in this century (Les Actes apocryphes de l'apôtre André. Louvain, 1911), and two reconstructions of the "original" Acts of Andrew, presenting the relevant sources and providing translations, have appeared almost simultaneously in the past few years: MacDonald's own (The Acts of Andrew and the Acts of Andrew and Matthias in the City of the Cannibals. Atlanta, 1990), and that of Jean-Marc Prieur in the Corpus Christianorum, Series Apocryphorum (Acta Andreae. 2 vol., Turnhout, 1989).
Acts of Thomas
M. R. James (translator):
From "The Apocryphal New Testament"; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924: This is the only one of the five primary romances which we possess in its entirety. It is of great length and considerable interest. The Stichometry (see p. 24) gives it only 1,600 lines: this is far too little: it may probably apply only to a portion of the Acts, single episodes of which, in addition to the Martyrdom, may have been current separately. We do, in fact, find some separate miracles in some of the oriental versions. There is a consensus of opinion among Syriac scholars that our Greek text of these Acts is a version from Syriac. The Syriac original was edited and translated by Wright in his Apocryphal Acts, and older fragments have since been published by Mrs. Lewis (Horae Semiticae IV, 1904. Mythological Acts of the Apostles). Certain hymns occur in the Syriac which were undoubtedly composed in that language: most notable is the Hymn of the Soul (edited separately by A. A. Bevan, and others) which is not relevant to the context. It has been ascribed to Bardaisan the famous Syrian heretic. Only one Greek MS. of the Acts (the Vallicellian, at Rome, Bonnet's MS. U, of the eleventh century) contains it; it is paraphrased by Nicetas of Thessalonica in his Greek rechauffe of the Acts. There is, in fact, no room to doubt that the whole text of the Acts, as preserved complete in MS. U and partially in other manuscripts, is a translation from the Syriac. But in the Martyrdom four manuscripts (including a very important Paris copy-Gr. 1510, of eleventh century, and another of ninth century) present a quite different, and superior. text, indubitably superior in one striking point: that whereas Syr. places the great prayer of Thomas in the twelfth Act, some little time before the Martyrdom (ch. 144 sqq.), the four manuscripts place it immediately before, after ch. 167, and this is certainly the proper place for it. It is, I believe, still arguable (though denied by the Syriacists) that here is a relic of the original Greek text: in other words, the Acts were composed in Greek, and early rendered into Syriac. Becoming scarce or being wholly lost in Greek they were retranslated out of Syriac into Greek. But meanwhile the original Greek of the Martyrdom had survived separately, and we have it here. This was M. Bonnet's view, and it is one which I should like to adopt.
Geoff Trowbridge:
Aside from the section of the Acts of John known as the "Preaching of the Gospel," the Acts of Thomas (c. 200-225 C.E.) are probably the most overtly Gnostic of the apocryphal Acts, portraying Christ as the "Heavenly Redeemer" who can free souls from the darkness of the physical world. Surprisingly, Thomas is the only one of the five primary Acts to have survived in its entirety—in a Syriac text from the seventh century and a Greek text from the eleventh, as well as scores of fragments. While the Syriac texts are earlier and likely represent the original language of the work, they appear to have been purged of the unorthodox passages. Thus the Greek, though often poorly translated, represents the earlier tradition. Thomas is also the only book of Acts claiming apostolic authorship, though it is difficult to fathom how Thomas could have recorded his own martyrdom. Most believe the author wrote in the early third century, though links to the Gospel of Thomas may place it earlier. The book tells how the apostles drew lots to divide up the world for their missionary work, and India fell to Thomas. He gains Indian followers by performing exorcisms and ressurections, but is eventually sentenced to death after converting the wives of King Misdaeus and his kinsman Charisius. While in prison, Thomas sings the "Hymn of the Pearl," a poem that gained a great deal of popularity in orthodox circles.
Harold W. Attridge:
(The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 6, p. 531): Pseudepigraphic text which relates the adventures of the apostle Judas Thomas as he preaches an ascetical or encratite form of Christianity on the way to and from India. Like other apocryphal acts combining popular legend and religious propaganda, the work attempts to entertain and instruct. In addition to narratives of Thomas' adventures, its poetic and liturgical elements provide important evidence for early Syrian Christian traditions. Attridge writes about the attestation to the Acts of Thomas (op. cit., p. 531): The major Syriac witnesses (B.M. add. 14.645) dates to 936 C.E. the earliest Syriac witnesses to the text, a fragmentary palimpset (Sinai 30), dates from the 5th or 6th century. The major Greek witnesses (Paris. gr. 1510 and Vallicel. B 35) date to the 11th century, although there are partial Grek witnesses dating from the 10th. Some form of the work was clearly in circulation by the end of the 4th century when testimonies begin. Epiphanius (Anac. 47.1 and 60.1.5) records its use by Encratites. Augustine (de serm. dom. in monte 1.20.65; c. Adiamantium 17; c. Faustum 14 and 22.79) attests its use by Manicheans, and allusions are found in the Manichean Psalms. Attestations continue sporadically until the 9th-century Byzantine patriarch Photius (Cod. 114) and the 11th-century archbishop, Nicetas of Thessalonica, who paraphrased the work. The original composition is probably to be dated in the first half of the 3d century, slightly later than the Acts of Peter, John, and Paul, which are attested in the 2d century. Some sections, particularly the originally independent Hymn of the Pearl, presuppose conditions in the Parthian period, which ended with the establishment of the Sassanian Empire in 226 C.E. It is likely that Acts Thom. underwent redactional development, including adaptation by Manicheans, in the late 3d or 4th centuries.
Wikipedia:
The early 3rd century text called Acts of Thomas is arguably the most Gnostic of the New Testament apocrypha, portraying Christ as the "Heavenly Redeemer", independent of and beyond creation, who can free souls from the darkness of the world. References to the work by Epiphanius show that it was in circulation in the 4th century. The complete versions that survive are Syriac and Greek. There are many surviving fragments of the text. Scholars detect from the Greek that its original was written in Syriac, which places the Acts of Thomas in Syria. The surviving Syriac manuscripts, however, have been edited to purge them of the most unorthodox overtly gnostic passages, so that the Greek versions reflect the earlier tradition. Fragments of four other cycles of romances round the figure of the apostle Thomas survive, but this is the only complete one. It should not be confused with the early "sayings" Gospel of Thomas. "Like other apocryphal acts combining popular legend and religious propaganda, the work attempts to entertain and instruct. In addition to narratives of Thomas' adventures, its poetic and liturgical elements provide important evidence for early Syrian Christian traditions," according to the Anchor Bible Dictionary. Acts of Thomas is a series of episodic Acts (Latin passio) that occurred during the evangelistic mission of Judas Thomas ("Judas the Twin") to India.
Embedded in the Acts of Thomas at different places according to differing manuscript traditions is a Syriac hymn, The Hymn of the Pearl (WIKI Article), (or Hymn of the Soul), a poem that gained a great deal of popularity in mainstream Christian circles. The Hymn is older than the Acts into which it has been inserted, and is worth appreciating on its own. For interested readers see further a series of various translations of The Hymn of the Pearl, and an Explication of The Hymn of the Pearl as an Ascetic Allegory, and ancient Ode to Indian ascetism.
The Acts of Thomas as a "ascetic pagan" parody: Separate article associated with the thesis Constantine invented Christianity. An explication of the Acts of Thomas as a parody written by an author who was an ascetic pagan priest. It is proposed that the ascetic pagan priesthood, having been prohibited the traditional use and utility of their temple structure (eg: The Healing Temples of Asclepius, destroyed by Constantine) took up the pen of sedition against the Constantinian Canon. The chronology of the Acts of Thomas is thus presented in exact accord with the carbon dating citation 348 CE (+/- 60 years) associated with the Nag Hammadi Codices for the Gospel of Thomas, in which it is proposed, the phrase "Jesus said" was written by law of the Pontifex Maximus (Constantine) as the new god, against the ancient gnostic Egypto-Hellenic wisdom sayings of the ascetic traditions.
New Testament Non Canonical Christian Literature Index
New Testament Acts
NOTE: (1) (*R) denotes Eusebius says the text is REJECTED.
(*H) denotes Eusebius says the text is HERETICAL.
(2) The term "heretical" is a euphemism for "seditious".
(3) The hyperlinked non-canonical "Acts of the Apostles"
are explicated as polemical fourth century parodies
of the Constantinian New Testament Bible of c.331 CE
The Acts and Martyrdom of Andrew
The Acts and Martyrdom of Matthew
The Acts of Andrew and Matthew (*H)
The Acts of Andrew (*H)
The Acts of Barnabas (*R)
The Acts of John the Theologian
The Acts of John (*H)
The Acts of Paul and Thecla
The Acts of Paul (*R)
The Acts of Peter and Andrew
The Acts of Peter and Paul
The Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles (*H)
The Act of Peter
The Acts of Philip
The Acts of Thaddaeus
The Acts of Thomas
The Book of John Concerning the Death of Mary
The Book of Thomas the Contender
The Consummation of Thomas
The Death of Pilate
The Giving Up of Pontius Pilate
The History of Joseph the Carpenter
The Martyrdom of Matthew
The Mystery of the Cross-Excerpt from the Acts of John
The Passing of Mary
The Report of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius
New Testament Apocryphal / Apocalypse
The Apocalypse of Adam
The Apocalypse of James - First
The Apocalypse of James - Second
The Apocalypse of Paul - and fragments
The Apocalypse of Peter - and fragments (*R)
The Revelation of Esdras
The Revelation of John the Theologian
The Revelation of Moses
The Revelation of Paul
The Revelation of Peter
The Vision of Paul
New Testament Gospels
An Arabic Infancy Gospel
The Gospel of Bartholomew (*H)
The Gospel of James (*H)
The Gospel of Judas (*H)
The Gospel of Mary [Magdalene]
The Gospel of Nicodemus [Acts of Pilate]
The Gospel of Peter (*H)
The Gospel of Philip (*H)
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew (*H)
The Gospel of the Lord [by Marcion]
The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary
The Gospel of Thomas (*H)
The Gospel of Thomas - A 5th Century Compilation
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas [Greek Text A]
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas [Greek Text B]
The Infancy Gospel of Thomas [Latin Text]
The Secret Gospel of Mark - Now recognized as a 20th century hoax
by Stephen C. Carlson in The Gospel Hoax:
Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark
(Waco: Baylor University Press, 2005).
Other New Testament related Non Canonical Writings
Community Rule
John the Evangelist
Nag Hammadi Codices
The Apocryphon of James
The Apocryphon of John
The Avenging of the Saviour
The Book of Thomas the Contender
The Correspondence of Jesus and Abgar
The Correspondence of Paul and Seneca
The Epistle of the Apostles
The Epistle to the Laodiceans
The Letter of Peter to Philip
The Letter of Pontius Pilate to the Roman Emperor
The Narrative of Joseph of Arimathaea
The Pistis Sophia - Excerpts
The Prayer of the Apostle Paul
The Report of Pilate to Caesar
The Report of Pilate to Tiberius
The Sophia of Jesus Christ
The Teachings of Addeus the Apostle
The Three Steles of Seth
Nag Hammadi Codices
See this INDEX article.
Eusebius on the Non Canonical Literature
Chapter XXV.
The Divine Scriptures
that are Accept and
Those that are Not.
1 Since we are dealing with this subject
it is proper to sum up the writings of the New Testament
which have been already mentioned. First then must be put
the holy quaternion of the Gospels;
following them the Acts of the Apostles.
2 After this must be reckoned the epistles of Paul;
next in order the extant former epistle of John,
and likewise the epistle of Peter, must be maintained.
After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper,
the Apocalypse of John, concerning which we shall give
the different opinions at the proper time.
These then belong among the accepted writings.
3 Among the disputed writings,
which are nevertheless recognized by many,
are extant the so-called epistle of James
and that of Jude,
also the second epistle of Peter,
and those that are called the second and third of John,
whether they belong to the evangelist
or to another person of the same name.
4 Among the rejected writings must be reckoned also
* the Acts of Paul, and
* the so-called Shepherd, and
* the Apocalypse of Peter, and in addition to these
* the extant epistle of Barnabas, and
* the so-called Teachings of the Apostles; and besides, as I said,
* the Apocalypse of John, if it seem proper,
which some, as I said, reject,
but which others class with the accepted books.
5 And among these some have placed also
the Gospel according to the Hebrews,
with which those of the Hebrews that
have accepted Christ are especially delighted.
And all these may be reckoned among the disputed books.
6 But we have nevertheless felt compelled
to give a catalogue of these also,
distinguishing those works which according
to ecclesiastical tradition are
true and genuine and commonly accepted,
from those others which,
although not canonical but disputed,
are yet at the same time known
to most ecclesiastical writers-
we have felt compelled to give this catalogue
in order that we might be able to know both
these works and those that are cited
by the heretics under the name of the apostles,
including, for instance, such books as
* the Gospels of Peter,
* of Thomas,
* of Matthias,
* or of any others besides them, and
* the Acts of Andrew and John and
* (John) and
* the other apostles,
which no one belonging to the succession
of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy
of mention in his writings.
7 And further, the character of the style
is at variance with apostolic usage,
and both the thoughts and the purpose
of the things that are related in them
are so completely out of accord
with true orthodoxy that they
clearly show themselves to be
the fictions of heretics.
Wherefore they are not to be placed
even among the rejected writings,
but are all of them to be cast aside
as absurd and impious.
Let us now proceed with our history.
Chapter XXVI. Menander the Sorcerer.
|
|
11-12-2008, 04:35 PM
