Ben C Smith

I would welcome feedback regarding an interesting tapestry of verbal and conceptual connections between Papias, Luke, and the first Johannine epistle. The connections between what Papias says that the elder (John) said about Mark and what Luke says in his preface are not new to scholars; speculation has abounded for some time. But I do not think that the connections between the Lucan preface and 1 John 1.1 are quite as well known. I here lay out the texts for convenience.

Eusebius, History of the Church 3.39.14-15:

And in his own writing [Papias] delivers also other accounts of the abovementioned Aristion of the words of the Lord, and the traditions of the elder John, to which we send those who love learning. Necessarily we now add to his reports set forth before a tradition which, about Mark who wrote the gospel, he sets out through these words: And the elder would say this: Mark, who had become the interpreter of Peter, wrote accurately [ακριβως], yet not in order [ταξει], as many things as he remembered of the things either said or done by the Lord. For he neither heard [ηκουσεν] the Lord nor followed him, but later, as I said, Peter, who would make the teachings to the needs, but not making them as an ordering together of the lordly oracles, so that Mark did not sin having thus written certain things as he remembered them. For he made one provision, to leave out nothing of the things that he heard or falsify anything in them.

Luke 1.1-4:

Inasmuch as many [πολλοι] took in hand to arrange an account about the facts that have been fulfilled among us, just as those who were eyewitnesses [αυτοπται] from the beginning [απ αρχης] and who became attendants of the word [του λογου] delivered them to us, it seemed fit for me also, having followed all things from the first, to write to you accurately [ακριβως], in order [καθεξης], most excellent Theophilus, so that you might know the secure basis concerning the words about which you have been instructed.

For the concept of trumping the many, we turn also to the preface of Papias according to Eusebius, History of the Church 3.39.3:

For I did not rejoice, like the many [πολλοι], over those who spoke many things.

1 John 1.1:

What was from the beginning [απ αρχης], what we have heard [ακηκοαμεν], what we have seen with our eyes [εωρακαμεν τοις οφθαλμοις], what we beheld and our hands handled [εψηλαφησαν], concerning the word of life....

The word ψηλαφαω in 1 John 1.1 is not an entirely common one; in the New Testament it is found elsewhere only at Acts 17.27, Hebrews 12.18, and (most interestingly for our Lucan connection) at Luke 24.39:

See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle [ψηλαφησατε] me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.

(The word does appear about 16 times in the LXX.)

The gospel of Luke has a good number of literary connections with the Johannine writings (mainly the gospel) quite apart from the explicitly editorial connections laid out above. Did the author of Luke know the author of (some or all of) the Johannine texts? Are they the same author? (This one does not seem very likely to me, but I mention it for the sake of completeness.) Or is this concentration of similar vocabulary simply indicative of an early Christian emphasis, having no bearing on direct literary borrowing?

All relevant observations or hypotheses both sacred or profane are welcome.

Ben.

Peter Kirby

If the Gospel of John is created in stages, it would be useful to know which stages the literary affinities to Luke are found in.

For completeness, shouldn't the idea that the redactor or author of John knew the Gospel of Luke be mentioned?

regards,
Peter Kirby

Ben C Smith

Yes, it should. In fact, I thought I did mention it. In fact, that is my own default position! Not sure how I managed to skip it. :blush:

Thanks.

Ben.

Tim Lewis

Shouldn't we expect similar vocabulary for describing the process of recalling tradition? Seems fairly standard language.

But perhaps I should take a closer look. Has some kind of relationship between the three ever been formally proposed?

Tim Lewis

Vorkosigan

I always thought that Luke's dating of Jesus age came from GJohn.

Yes, Tim, there were a couple of books arguing that Luke depends on John out in the last few years

In Dialogue With Another Gospel?: The Influence of the Fourth Gospel on the Passion Narrative of the Gospel of Luke (or via: amazon.co.uk), by Mark Matson.

New Light on Luke: Its Purpose, Sources and Literary Context_ Barbara Shellard (or via: amazon.co.uk) (JSNT Supplement Series. Sheffield Academic, New York, 2002. ISBN 1-84127-236-1)?

I've never read either, so can't comment.

Vorkosigan

Ben C Smith

This is interesting. Can you elaborate?

I think that the introduction of Mary and Martha is a fairly clear sign that the author (or final redactor?) of John knew the gospel of Luke (Streeter has some good information on this in The Four Gospels), but I have also suspected that Luke had access to a vein of Johannine material somewhere.

Ben.

Ben C Smith

Yes, I think it is for the most part fairly standard language used by ancient historians; however, a phrase like from the beginning, I think, would not belong to that same class, and there are a lot of other standard historiographical words that do not appear in these texts.

Ben.

Tim Lewis

When you say that the phrase "from the beginning" [απ αρχης] would not belong to the same class, do you mean that it is not necessarily something we would expect to see in common between John, 1 John, Luke & Papias? Or perhaps that it generally wasn't a book production term/phrase?

I notice that the phrase is used a lot throughout 1 John (about 8 times). Luke uses a similar phrase ANWQEN (I'm yet to discover how to get a Greek font besides cutting & pasting!) "from the top" in close proximity here (i.e. next verse Lk 1:3) as he also does for Paul's early career in Acts 26:4-5 where both phrases also appear together (ANWQEN is used in John rather differently as "from above"/i.e. from God).

Perhaps the phrase "from the beginning" [απ αρχης] already had a 'biblical' sound to it (cf. Genesis 1:1 & Mark 1:1) a good 'origins/derivations' phrase for implicating God's hand in history.

Tim Lewis

Ben C Smith

The latter, mainly.

My short list of possible positions included a mere common emphasis in early Christianity. I take it your position is that this concentration of similar or identical terms between the elder, 1 John, and Luke is of that nature, a common emphasis.

What do you make of the facts that Papias has an elder named John on hand and 2 and 3 John are written by somebody who calls himself the elder? Same person or not?

That is true; the phrase pops up all over the LXX.

Ben.

darstec

Don't you really mean what Eusebius said rather than what Papias said? It is my understanding we have absolutely nothing written by Papias and only copies of copies of copies of the words Eusebius put into the mouth of Papias. Until we have evidence Papias said anything at all, wouldn't it be more accurate to state Eusebius said thus separating even further the chance that any information is reliable?