Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 01-28-2013, 05:54 PM

There are reasons to think that De resurrectione is not by Athenagoras (c.133 – 190 CE) but by some 4th-century author, e.g. the use of at least one term (ἀγαλματοφορέω) coined by Philo of Alexandria and not widely known before the time of Origen. This claim is found here.

Athenagoras was supposedly an Ante-Nicene Christian apologist who styles himself as "Athenagoras, the Athenian, Philosopher, and Christian". His two major works are supposed to be 1) Embassy (πρεσβεία) for the Christians (often referred to the Apology) and 2) a treatise titled the Resurrection of the Dead aka On the Resurrection of the Body.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenagoras_of_Athens

Quote:

Originally Posted by WIKI

The treatise on the Resurrection of the Dead,

the first complete exposition of the doctrine in Christian literature, was written later than the Apology, to which it may be considered as an appendix. The writer brings to the defence of the doctrine the best that contemporary philosophy could adduce. After meeting the objections common to his time, he seeks to prove the possibility of a resurrection in view either of the power of the Creator, or of the nature of our bodies. To exercise such powers is neither unworthy of God nor unjust to other creatures. He argues that the nature and end of man demand a perpetuation of the life of body and soul.

There are reasons to think that De resurrectione is not by Athenagoras but by some 4th-century author, e.g. the use of at least one term (ἀγαλματοφορέω) coined by Philo of Alexandria and not widely known before the time of Origen.

One source of further information about this claim is found in David T. Runia's Philo in Early Christian Literature: A Survey in Chapter 6 dealing with the Apologist Athenagoras. See pages 105 - 109.

NB: the google index lists a pdf.

stephan huller · 01-29-2013, 12:50 AM

OMG! Are you telling me that some of the works attributed to early Church Fathers are forgeries written in the fourth century and later? Heaven forbid! I can't believe it. Oh wait - I get it - THIS PROVES THAT ALL THE LITERATURE ATTRIBUTED TO PRE-NICENE FIGURES ARE ALSO FOURTH CENTURY FORGERIES. Yes, yes - now I get it.

That's just like, if one mother drowns her baby then ALL MOTHERS drown their babies. Or, wait, wait I get it - if I like putting pineapple on my pizza then everyone must like pineapple on their pizza. This is so easy - and so much fun - I must try this for hours and hours. It makes life so easy! Thanks Pete. You have this way of making everything so straightforward.

Huon · 01-29-2013, 01:19 AM

Oh Your God, Stephan ! mountainman did not write that "some of the works attributed to early Church Fathers are forgeries written in the fourth century and later". He mentioned that the Apology of Athenagoras could have been modified after the death of the author.

Another question : from what sources do we get the texts of Athenagoras ?

sotto voce · 01-29-2013, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Oh Your God, Stephan !

Très bien! Though I think that may be 'gods', depending on wind direction.

andrewcriddle · 01-29-2013, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Oh Your God, Stephan ! mountainman did not write that "some of the works attributed to early Church Fathers are forgeries written in the fourth century and later". He mentioned that the Apology of Athenagoras could have been modified after the death of the author.

Another question : from what sources do we get the texts of Athenagoras ?

The Supplicatio and De Resurrectione are preserved in the Arethas Codex. See Athenagoras.

One should note that although De Resurrectione is probably not by Athenagoras it is not a forgery. It is an anonymous work which was long afterwards attributed (rightly or wrongly) to Athenagoras.

Andrew Criddle

stephan huller · 01-29-2013, 02:34 PM

Oh yes Huon. Whenever you see Pete write about 'Church documents' and the 'fourth century' in the same sentence - it is hard to know where things are going to lead. Like leaving a chocolate bar on the ground near my dog. Hard to figure out what the carpet's going to look like in a few minutes.

aa5874 · 01-29-2013, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

There are reasons to think that De resurrectione is not by Athenagoras (c.133 – 190 CE) but by some 4th-century author, e.g. the use of at least one term (ἀγαλματοφορέω) coined by Philo of Alexandria and not widely known before the time of Origen. This claim is found here....

A careful study of "On the Resurrection of the Body" attributed to Athenagoras shows that the author was a NOT a Christian of the Jesus cult and that the author believed in One God--Not Jesus.

In fact, both writings ["The Plea for the Christians" and "On the Resurrection of the Dead"] attributed to Athenagoras do not mention Jesus or Jesus Christ or that he was crucified, buried and raised from the dead.

Athenagoras wrote NOTHING at all about the sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus after three days for the Remission of Sins.

Now, if "On the Resurrection of the Dead" was composed by a Christian of the Jesus cult then we KNOW exactly what would be written.

I present " On the Resurrection of the Flesh" attributed to Tertullian.

Let us compare them.

Athenagoras mentioned Jesus Christ ZERO times.
Tertullian mentioned Jesus Christ over 120 times

Athenagoras never claimed Jesus Christ was raised from the dead.
Tertullian claimed Jesus Christ was raised from the dead.

Athenagoras did NOT make any references to the Gospels called Matthew, Luke and John.
Tertullian made many many references to Matthew, Luke and John.

Athenagoras did NOT mention Acts of the Apostles.
Tertullian used passages from Acts.

Athenagoras did NOT name any Epistles of Paul.
Tertullian named the Epistles of Paul with over 100 references.

Athenagoras did not claim Jesus was God and the Creator.
Tertullian claimed Jesus was "our LORD and God".

It is clear that "On the Resurrection of the Dead" attributed to Athenagoras is NOT a product of the Roman Church or a Christian of the Jesus cult. All the fundamental elements are missing.

However, Tertullian's "On the Resurrection of the Flesh" perfectly matches those of the Roman Church or Christians of the Jesus cult.

Tertullian's "On the Resurrection of the Flesh"

Quote:

[b][i]...Therefore he adds in the concluding sentence: “Knowing that He which raised up the Lord Jesus, shall raise up us also with Him,” risen as He is already from the dead.

[u]1 Clement's Letter from the Church of Rome

Quote:

Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand...

The Donation of Constantine

Quote:

But he, the most holy pope, did not at all allow that crown of gold to be used over the clerical crown which he wears to the glory of St. Peter; but we placed upon his most holy head, with our own hands, a tiara of gleaming splendour representing the glorious resurrection of our Lord.

mountainman · 01-29-2013, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Another question : from what sources do we get the texts of Athenagoras ?

Andrew has already mentioned the Arethas Codex.

Who attested to Writings of Athenagoras?

Quote:

The following is the original Introductory Notice:—

It is one of the most singular facts in early ecclesiastical history, that the name of Athenagoras is scarcely ever mentioned.

Only two references to him and his writings have been discovered.

One of these occurs in the work of Methodius, On the Resurrection of the Body, as preserved by Epiphanius (Hœr., lxiv.) and Photius (Biblioth., ccxxxiv.).

The other notice of him is found in the writings696 of Philip of Side, in Pamphylia, who flourished in the early part of the fifth century.

It is very remarkable that Eusebius should have been altogether silent regarding him; and that writings, so elegant and powerful as are those which still exist under his name, should have been allowed in early times to sink into almost entire oblivion.

We know with certainty regarding Athenagoras, that he was an Athenian philosopher who had embraced Christianity, and that his Apology, or, as he styles it, “Embassy” (πρεσβεία), was presented to the Emperors Aurelius and Commodus about a.d. 177. He is supposed to have written a considerable number of works, but the only other production of his extant is his treatise on the Resurrection. It is probable that this work was composed somewhat later than the Apology (see chap. xxxvi.), though its exact date cannot be determined.

Philip of Side also states that he preceded Pantænus as head of the catechetical school at Alexandria; but this is probably incorrect, and is contradicted by Eusebius. A more interesting and perhaps well-rounded statement is made by the same writer respecting Athenagoras, to the effect that he was won over to Christianity while reading the Scriptures in order to controvert them.697

Both his Apology and his treatise on the Resurrection display a practiced pen and a richly cultured mind. He is by far the most elegant, and certainly at the same time one of the ablest, of the early Christian Apologists.

mountainman · 01-29-2013, 08:18 PM

Athenagoras or Pseudo-Athenagoras by Robert M. Grant

The Harvard Theological Review , Vol. 47, No. 2 (Apr., 1954), pp. 121-129

Huon · 01-30-2013, 12:38 AM

Quote:

The famous 'Arethas' codex is held at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, where it has the shelfmark Codex Parisinus Graecus 451 (A). This manuscript was copied at the request of Archbishop Arethas of Caesarea in 914, and was designed as a collection of apologetic works from earliest times down to Eusebius. (See MSS of Eusebius PE for details). It is often the only manuscript for many of the second century apologists, although it does not contain Justin, Theophilus, the letter to Diognetus or Hermias.

andrewcriddle thank you,
mountainman thank you.

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

01-29-2013, 12:50 AM	#2
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	OMG! Are you telling me that some of the works attributed to early Church Fathers are forgeries written in the fourth century and later? Heaven forbid! I can't believe it. Oh wait - I get it - THIS PROVES THAT ALL THE LITERATURE ATTRIBUTED TO PRE-NICENE FIGURES ARE ALSO FOURTH CENTURY FORGERIES. Yes, yes - now I get it. That's just like, if one mother drowns her baby then ALL MOTHERS drown their babies. Or, wait, wait I get it - if I like putting pineapple on my pizza then everyone must like pineapple on their pizza. This is so easy - and so much fun - I must try this for hours and hours. It makes life so easy! Thanks Pete. You have this way of making everything so straightforward.

01-29-2013, 01:19 AM	#3
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	Oh Your God, Stephan ! mountainman did not write that "some of the works attributed to early Church Fathers are forgeries written in the fourth century and later". He mentioned that the Apology of Athenagoras could have been modified after the death of the author. Another question : from what sources do we get the texts of Athenagoras ?

01-29-2013, 02:34 PM	#6
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Oh yes Huon. Whenever you see Pete write about 'Church documents' and the 'fourth century' in the same sentence - it is hard to know where things are going to lead. Like leaving a chocolate bar on the ground near my dog. Hard to figure out what the carpet's going to look like in a few minutes.

01-29-2013, 08:18 PM	#9
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Athenagoras or Pseudo-Athenagoras by Robert M. Grant The Harvard Theological Review , Vol. 47, No. 2 (Apr., 1954), pp. 121-129

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.