Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 09-10-2013, 08:50 PM

And about the same thing could be said about Tatian.

mountainman · 09-10-2013, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Eusebius claims that Serapion reported that he walked into a Gnostic library and “borrowed” a copy of the Gospel of Peter. See HE Book 6, Chapter XII. Serapion and His Extant Works

Not that I can see:

Quote:

Chapter XII. Serapion and His Extant Works.

1 It is probable that others have preserved other memorials of Serapion's67 literary industry,68 but there have reached us only those addressed to a certain Domninus, who, in the time of persecution, fell away from faith in Christ to the Jewish will-worship;69 and those addressed to Pontius and Caricus,70 ecclesiastical men, and other letters to different persons, and still another work composed by him on the so-called Gospel of Peter.71

2 He wrote this last to refute the falsehoods which that Gospel contained, on account of some in the parish of Rhossus72 who had been led astray by it into heterodox notions. It may be well to give some brief extracts from his work, showing his opinion of the book. He writes as follows:

3 "For we, brethren, receive both Peter and the other apostles as Christ; but we reject intelligently the writings falsely ascribed to them, knowing that such were not handed down to us.

4 When I visited you I supposed that all of you held the true faith, and as I had not read the Gospel which they put forward under the name of Peter, I said, If This is the Only Thing Which Occasions Dispute Among You, Let It Be Read. But now having learned, from what has been told me, that their mind was involved in some heresy, I will hasten to come to you again.

5 Therefore, brethren, expect me shortly. But you will learn, brethren, from what has been written to you, that we perceived the nature of the heresy of Marcianus,73 and that, not understanding, what he was saying, he contradicted himself.

6 For having obtained this Gospel from others who had studied it diligently, namely, from the successors of those who first used it, whom we call Docet74 (for most of their opinions are connected with the teaching of that school75 ) we have been able to read it through, and we find many things in accordance with the true doctrine of the Saviour, but some things added to that doctrine, which we have pointed out for you farther on." So much in regard to Serapion.

Serapion claims to have obtained the Gospel of Peter from those who studied and preserved the book and names them as the "Docetae" (the Docetic heretics). He refers to them as a school. We may infer that the Gospel of Peter (and other books) were preserved by this "Docetae" school in a library (perhaps small) associated with this school and its successors.

mountainman · 09-10-2013, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

You are welcome to your opinion, of course.

But if the Roman Church was favored in this period (Eusebius, Irenaeus, Philosophumena etc) especially in the age of Commodus and if the desire was there on the part of Irenaeus et al to preach their message to the better members of society what logical reason can there be to Christian writings not being present in the public libraries if no policy of discrimination can be demonstrated in that period. I am not saying I can prove it yet. It is just an open question with no answer. At least as far as I can see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I am at a complete loss how to answer this question satisfactorily

Perhaps you must first acknowledge two facts:

(1) There were often great libraries associated with the larger pagan temples, such as the Asclepian temples at Aegae and Pergamun for example. These were in addition to the public and private libraries.

(2) Eusebius claims that the Christians had physical churches which were destroyed during the persecutions, and it is therefore entirely natural to conjecture that if this is the case, then these physical church buildings had also associated with them, libraries for the Christian material, just as the pagan temples had libraries associated with them for the pagan material. Eusebius also claims that not only were the physical Christian church buildings destroyed, but also that the Christian writings were burnt.

Therefore to answer your question you could theoretically claim that there was a network of Christian churches in the empire (in parallel with the pagan temples) and that these physical buildings had associated libraries (also in parallel with the pagan temple libraries).

mountainman · 09-10-2013, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

You are forgetting that Christianity remained illegal all through this period. And remember also ... we're not discussing moral, but literary reputation. Christian books didn't have a high reputation. They weren't classical, in this period.

Attic Greek was generally favoured over Koine Greek especially during the Second Sophistic

Quote:

I don't know in detail; or even whether we know, how libraries acquired books. Martial donated his to the emperor. The library of Alexandria acquired them in all sorts of ways.

I suspect ... guessing ... you have a modern idea of the public library in mind. I really don't think it worked like that.

Collections of books (and letters) were often made. Hadrian was supposed to have collected the letters and books of Apollonius of Tyana. As time went on it may be that existing libraries eventually acquired such collections.

outhouse · 09-10-2013, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I strongly suspect they were. Here are my reasons for thinking so:

.

I cant buy it.

They state we only have a fraction of what once existed. Even in partially true, many were lost.

Quote:

1. Celsus draws on a wide range of sources. I don't think he was purchasing Christian manuscripts and keeping them in a private collection.

I think good valuable material from private collections made it to these centers of study, where he studied. Not out of monetary gain, but love of the movement. I doubt he was alone in all this, library? I don't think so. Just my 2cents

I think a lot of Christianity would have been the second hand stuff was just pushed in a stack off to the side, with popular stuff on top.

He was more interested in ancient Egyptian theology, I bet he had quite the collection.

Quote:

2. Part of the Catholic Church's effort to distinguish themselves from the heresies was their openness. They didn't have secret gospels. (Praescr Haer 22) What better way to demonstrate their openness than have their books in public libraries?

They were not viewed as favorable or decent people, they stayed out of the lime light and we know they were often portrayed in a very negative light due to outsiders ignorance of the real theology.

Their writings were not that popular, and I don't see them getting introduced early on publicly.

Heresy was what they viewed other members as who didn't follow shat they thought was right at the time.

Not outsiders looking in.

Quote:

3. If Christians preached openly then what would stop them from wanting their books held in public libraries?

Im not sure how open they really were. I don't think they were early on.

Quote:

4. I think that the apologetic works - especially appeals to the Emperor - would have wanted to gain as great an audience as possible.

Makes sense. But I have a feeling some were intended for anyone but the Emperor.

Quote:

5. Tert., Apol. 31.1 (142,5-6 DEK.) says that Christians do not hide their books which "many occasions transfer to outsiders."

Ignorant to that brother, but context is probably key. That and the different pater familias that a quote like that could belong too.

Roger Pearse · 09-11-2013, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

I read this a little differently. To me, there is no mention of autographs; the originals are handed down by copying.

Ok I can live with that. But one can read the text as the true copies of Matthew (3.9.1), Mark (3.1.1) and Luke (3.14.1, 1.27.2) even the Pauline writings (1.27.2) were in the possession of the Church at Rome at the time Irenaeus was writing. John by contrast was slightly more controversial. It was at Ephesus and Polycarp testified to its authenticity, no? I don't see any evidence that the copy of John was 'at Rome' at the time Irenaeus was writing any of this unless I am misunderstanding something or I am reading too much into this. There is a 'here' argument - i.e. the manuscripts are right here available to us and John is 'there' (Ephesus) cf. 3.1.1 "Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia" and 3.3.4 via Polycarp etc and "the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles." The manuscript of John even a copy of it is the only one where readers are directed to another place meaning by inference that the three - Matthew, Mark and Luke are 'here' (Rome). The question is where? I say the Palatine library or some public library in Rome.

Sorry: I just don't think the text will bear all these interesting possibilities. It has to actually start referring to volumes or tomes or something physical before we can do this.

All the best,

Roger

Roger Pearse · 09-11-2013, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Hopefully someone gets the point. How did the canonical gospels "beat" their heretical counterparts?

The question sort of presumes that there was no inherent difference; that all started equal and more or less equivalent. But this is not how the early Christian writers speak or discuss the subject. They talk about material handed down by the apostles to the churches that they founded.

Creation of fake "gospels" has been a cottage industry right down to our own time. We need no special theory to account for the rejection of these.

MrMacSon · 09-11-2013, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

No its not

I agree with this statement (from another thread)

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The time when the Jesus story was fabricated most likely coincided with supposed Prophecies about the coming of the Kingdom of God in the Septuagint or similar source.

andrewcriddle · 09-11-2013, 11:47 AM

Thank you Stephan and Roger and others for a very interesting thread.

Andrew Criddle

stephan huller · 09-11-2013, 12:01 PM

I know, you know the old saying about an endless number of monkeys and typewriters producing Shakespeare. I have produced so many bad threads here that eventually one would come along that hit on something interesting. Sort of like playing the slot machines or buying a lottery ticket.

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

09-10-2013, 08:50 PM	#71
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	And about the same thing could be said about Tatian.

09-11-2013, 11:47 AM	#79
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	Thank you Stephan and Roger and others for a very interesting thread. Andrew Criddle

09-11-2013, 12:01 PM	#80
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	I know, you know the old saying about an endless number of monkeys and typewriters producing Shakespeare. I have produced so many bad threads here that eventually one would come along that hit on something interesting. Sort of like playing the slot machines or buying a lottery ticket.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.