Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Gamera · 03-06-2007, 06:59 PM

From the comments of Eusebius, we can derive what types of writing Papias undertook, and it appeared to be pure exegesis of biblical passages. Indeed Eusebius scoffs at what to him appears to be the outlandishness of Papias' commentaries on Christian scripture, described as "strange parables of the Saviour and teachings of His, and other mythical matters."

In addition, the description of Papias' 5 volumes appear to be nonnarrative in content.

All this makes the odd legend of Judas' death, attributed to Papias by Eusebius, all the more striking: "[Judas'] body having swollen to such extent that he could not pass where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels gushed out."

Assuming this is an accurate attribution, the real question is, why did Papias, an exegete given to elaborate interpretations of biblical texts, wander into narrative mode and provide a history of Judas' death? It seems out of sinc with his mentality, based on how his writings are described.

I might suggest that the "legend" wasn't intended as an historical narrative at all, but one of Papias' "strange parables." I haven't researched the matter, but I recollect that Jewish and Christian exegetes (such as Maimonides) often took the chariot as a divine symbol of God's acting upon the world. It may be that having a chariot kill Judas was intended as paradigmatic of how God used Judas (and his poor choice) in the Jesus narrative. Further I recall entrails being associated with the conscience in various exegeses (perhaps Origen).

If this is so, Papias' "legend" of Judas may really be a parable of Judas' life, not a rendition of his death, which is more in tune of what little we know about Papias' writing regime.

S.C.Carlson · 03-06-2007, 07:39 PM

By "strange parables of the Savior and teachings of His," I think Eusebius was referring, among other things, the parable of millennial fertility quoted by Irenaeus in AH 5.33.3:

Quote:

5.33.3 And so the predicted blessing undeniably relates to the times of the kingdom, when the just will reign after rising from the dead, when also creation renewed and liberated will produce a multitude of all kinds of foods, «from the dew of heaven and the fertility of the earth» just as the elders who saw John the disciple of the Lord remember them hearing from him how the Lord would teach about those times and say:

The days will come in which vines will germinate, single vines having a myriad of shoots, and on each shoot a myriad of branches, and on each branch a myriad of twigs, and on each twig, a myriad of clusters, and in each cluster, a myriad of grapes, and each grape when presses yields twenty-five measures of wine.

And when any of the saints grabs a cluster, another cluster will cry out: “I am better, use me, bless the Lord through me.”

Similarly, wheat will produce a myriad of ears, and each ear will have a myriad of grains, and each grain five double pounds of pure fine white flour; and moreover other fruits and seeds and plants in accordance with the consequent proportion for them, and all the animals, using for their foods what is received from the earth, will be made peaceful and mutually agreeable, subject to people in all submission.

As for your other point, if πρηνὴς γενόμενος in Acts 1:18 is taken as "swelling up" instead of "falling headlong" (see footnote f in the NRSV) so that it reads "Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickness; and swelling up he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out," then the death of Judas attributed to Papias looks like an attempt to expound on that tradition of Judas's death.

Stephen

jakejonesiv · 03-07-2007, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S.C.Carlson

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamera

All this makes the odd legend of Judas' death, attributed to Papias by Eusebius, all the more striking: "[Judas'] body having swollen to such extent that he could not pass where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels gushed out."

As for your other point, if πρηνὴς γενόμενος in Acts 1:18 is taken as "swelling up" instead of "falling headlong" (see footnote f in the NRSV) so that it reads "Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickness; and swelling up he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out," then the death of Judas attributed to Papias looks like an attempt to expound on that tradition of Judas's death.

Stephen

You didn't correct Gamera on the source of Papias' comments on Judas. As you did me here.

S.C.Carlson · 03-07-2007, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

You didn't correct Gamera on the source of Papias' comments on Judas. As you did me here.

I missed it, sorry. I was too distracted by the "strange parables" idea. But, yes, Gamera got the tradent wrong for the death of Judas. It's from an excerpt of a lost commentary of Apolinaris, not Eusebius.

Stephen

Gamera · 03-07-2007, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by S.C.Carlson

I missed it, sorry. I was too distracted by the "strange parables" idea. But, yes, Gamera got the tradent wrong for the death of Judas. It's from an excerpt of a lost commentary of Apolinaris, not Eusebius.

Stephen

My bad. Thanks for the correction. But it doesn't change the issue. It's just odd that we have a critique of Papias for "strange parables" and then we get what looks like a strange parable of Judas.

03-06-2007, 06:59 PM	#1
Gamera Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Palm Springs, California Posts: 10,955	A footnote on Papias and Exegesis From the comments of Eusebius, we can derive what types of writing Papias undertook, and it appeared to be pure exegesis of biblical passages. Indeed Eusebius scoffs at what to him appears to be the outlandishness of Papias' commentaries on Christian scripture, described as "strange parables of the Saviour and teachings of His, and other mythical matters." In addition, the description of Papias' 5 volumes appear to be nonnarrative in content. All this makes the odd legend of Judas' death, attributed to Papias by Eusebius, all the more striking: "[Judas'] body having swollen to such extent that he could not pass where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels gushed out." Assuming this is an accurate attribution, the real question is, why did Papias, an exegete given to elaborate interpretations of biblical texts, wander into narrative mode and provide a history of Judas' death? It seems out of sinc with his mentality, based on how his writings are described. I might suggest that the "legend" wasn't intended as an historical narrative at all, but one of Papias' "strange parables." I haven't researched the matter, but I recollect that Jewish and Christian exegetes (such as Maimonides) often took the chariot as a divine symbol of God's acting upon the world. It may be that having a chariot kill Judas was intended as paradigmatic of how God used Judas (and his poor choice) in the Jesus narrative. Further I recall entrails being associated with the conscience in various exegeses (perhaps Origen). If this is so, Papias' "legend" of Judas may really be a parable of Judas' life, not a rendition of his death, which is more in tune of what little we know about Papias' writing regime.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.