"At face value, Irenaeus' chronology yields Lukan priority"

[Secret Alias]

You're switching gears. I am trying to understand what Irenaeus believed. Again I ask (more directly) isn't this something you missed in your analysis:

And with him (Paul) performed the work of an evangelist (gospel writer)

Clearly that makes clear that as Irenaeus lays out the chronology of Luke and Paul's working together (corresponding with Acts 28/2 Timothy 4 = Paul residing in Rome for two years) Irenaeus says that Luke and Paul collaborated on a gospel.

[Secret Alias]

With regard to those who allege that Paul alone knew the truth, and that to him the mystery was manifested by revelation, let Paul himself convict them, when he says, that one and the same God wrought in Peter for the apostolate of the circumcision, and in himself for the Gentiles.

Eos autem qui dicunt, solum Paulum veritatem cognovisse, cui per revelationem manifestatum est mysterium, ipse Paulus convincat eos, dicens, unum et ipsum Deum operatum Petro in Apostolatum circumcisionis, et sibi in Gentes. (Gal 2.8)

Peter, therefore, was an apostle of that very God whose was also Paul; and Him whom Peter preached as God among those of the circumcision, and likewise the Son of God, did Paul also among the Gentiles ...

Ipsius ergo Dei Petrus erat Apostolus, cujus et Paulus : et quem Petrus in circumcisione annuntiabat Deum, et Dei Filium, hunc et Paulus in Gentes.

But that Paul acceded to those who summoned him to the apostles, on account of the question [which had been raised], and went up to them, with Barnabas, to Jerusalem, not without reason, but that the liberty of the Gentiles might be confirmed by them, he does himself say, in the Epistle to the Galatians: "Then, fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking also Titus. But I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that Gospel which I preached among the Gentiles."

Quoniam autem his, qui ad Apostolos vocaverunt eum de quaestione, acquievit Paulus, et ascendit ad eos cum Barnaba in Hierosolymam, non sine causa, sed ut ab ipsis libertas Gentilium confirmaretur, ipse ait in ea quae ad Galatas est epistola: Deinde post xiv annos ascendi Hierosolymam cum Barnaba, assumens et Titum. Ascendi autem secundum revelationem, et contuli cum eis Evangelium, quod praedico inter Gentes."

And again he says, "For an hour we did give place to subjection, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you."

Et iterum ait : Ad horam cessimus subjectioni, uti Veritas Ev angela perseveret apud vos.

If, then, any one shall, from the Acts of the Apostles, carefully scrutinize the time concerning which it is written that he went up to Jerusalem on account of the forementioned question, he will find those years mentioned by Paul coinciding with it.

Si quis igitur diligenter ex Actibus Apostolorum scrutetur tempus, de quo scriptum est, Ascendi Hierosolymam, propter praedictam quaestionem, inveniet eos, qui praedicti sunt a Paulo, annos concurrentes.

Thus the statement of Paul harmonizes with, and is, as it were, identical with, the testimony of Luke regarding the apostles.

Sic est consonans et velut eadem tam Pauli annuntiatio, quam et Lucœ de Apostolis testificatio.

But that this Luke was inseparable from Paul, and his fellow-labourer in the Gospel, he himself clearly evinces, not as a matter of boasting, but as bound to do so by the truth itself.

Quoniam autem is Lucas inseparabilis fuit a Paulo, et cooperarius ejus in Evangelio, ipse facit manifestum, non glorians, sed ab ipsa productus veritate.

Barnabas, and John who was called Mark, he says had separated from Paul, and sailed to Cyprus, "we came to Troas;" and when Paul had beheld in a dream a man of Macedonia, saying, "Come into Macedonia, Paul, and help us," "immediately," he says, "we endeavoured to go into Macedonia, understanding that the Lord had called us to preach the Gospel unto them.

Separatis enim, inquit, a Paulo, et Barnaba et Johanne, qui vocabatur Marcus, et cum navigassent Cyprum, nos venimus in Troadem : et cum vidisset Paulus per somnium virum Macedonem dicentem : Veniens in Macedoniam opitulare nobis, Paule; statim, aiti quaesivimus proficisci in Macedoniama intelligentes quoniam provocavit nos Dominus eis.

"Therefore, sailing from Troas, we directed our ship's course towards Samothracia."

"Navigantes igitur a Troade, direximus navigium in Samothracen.

"

And then he carefully indicates all the rest of their journey as far as Philippi, and how they delivered their first address: "for, sitting down," he says, "we spake unto the women who had assembled;" and certain believed, even a great many.

et deinceps reliquum omnem ipsorum usque ad Philippos adventum diligenter significat, et quemad- modum primum sermonem locuti sunt: sedentes enim, inquit, locuti sumus mulieribus quae convenerant. et quinam crediderunt. et quam multi.

And again does he say, "But we sailed from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came to Troas, where we abode seven days."

Et iterum ait : Nos autem navigavimus post dies azymorum a Philippis, et venimus Troadem, ubi et commorati sumus diebus septem.

And all the remaining [details] of his course with Paul he recounts, indicating with all diligence both places, and cities, and number of days, until they went up to Jerusalem; and what befell Paul there, how he was sent to Rome in bonds; the name of the centurion who took him in charge; and the signs of the ships, and how they made shipwreck; and the island upon which they escaped, and how they received kindness there, Paul healing the chief man of that island; and how they sailed from thence to Puteoli, and from that arrived at Rome; and for what period they sojourned at Rome.

Et reliqua omnia ex ordine cum Paulo refert, omni diligentia demonstrans et loca, et civita- tes, et quantitatem dierum, quoadusque Hierosolymam ascende- rent: et quae illic contigerint Paulo, quemadmodum vinctus Romam missus est ; et nomen centurionis qui suscepit eum. et parasema navium, et quemadmodum naufragium fecerunt et in qua liberati sunt insula, et quemadmodum humanitatem ibi percepcrunt, Paullo curante principem ipsius insulas, et quemadmodum inde Puteolos navigaverunt, et inde Romam pervenerunt, et quanto tempore Romae commorati sunt.

As Luke was present at all these occurrences, he carefully noted them down in writing, so that he cannot be convicted of falsehood or boastfulness, because all these proved both that he was senior to all those who now teach otherwise, and that he was not ignorant of the truth.

omnibus his quum adesset Lucas, diligenter conscripsit ea, uti neque mendax neque elatus deprehendi possit, eo quod omnia haec constarent, et seniorem eum esse omnibus qui nunc aliud docent, neque ignorare veritatem.

That he was not merely a follower, but also a fellow-labourer of the apostles, but especially of Paul, Paul has himself declared also in the Epistles, saying: "Demas hath forsaken me, ... and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia. Only Luke is with me."

Quoniam non solum prosecutor, sed et cooperarius fuerit Apostolorum, maxime autem Pauli, et ipse autem Paulus manifestavit in epistolis, dicens : Demas me dereliquit, et abiit in Thessalonicam, Crescens in Galatiam, Titus in Dalmatiam Lucas est mecum solus"

From this he shows that he was always attached to and inseparable from him.

Unde ostendit quod semper junctus ei et inseparabilis fuerit ab eo.

And again he says, in the Epistle to the Colossians: "Luke, the beloved physician, greets you."

Et iterum in ea epistola quae est ad Colossenses, ait : Salutat vos Lucas medicus dilectus

.

But surely if Luke, who always preached in company with Paul, and is called by him "the beloved," and with him performed the work of an evangelist, and was entrusted to hand down to us a Gospel, learned nothing different from him (Paul), as has been pointed out from his words, how can these men, who were never attached to Paul, boast that they have learned hidden and unspeakable mysteries?

Si autem Lucas quidem, qui semper cum Paulo praedicavit, et dilectus ab eo est dictus, et cum eo evangelisavit, et creditus est referre nobis Evangelium, nihil aliud ab eo didicit, sicut ex verbis ejus ostensum est, quemadmodum hi qui nunquam Paulo adjuncti fuerunt, gloriantur abscondita et inenarrabilia didicisse sacramenta?

[TedM]

I don't know why you equate 'evangelist' with 'gospel writer'. What reason do you have for doing that? I don't mean any offense but let me explain why I 'switched gears': It's because your quote below strikes me (perhaps naively) as one of many types of arguments you make that seem wholly unpersuasive. However the strength of your convictions combined with your obvious broad knowledge of the subject makes me think you very well may be onto something that should be taken a lot more seriously. It would be helpful (for me) to know if your convictions have any seemingly strong arguments behind them like the mythers have with the 'silence' of Paul and others. If you aren't interested in that exercise, that's fine. With the exception of this particular thread I find I just dont have the time or inclination to pour into the kinds of arguments you make like we see in this thread, whereas something a lot stronger I might make the time for.

You're switching gears. I am trying to understand what Irenaeus believed. Again I ask (more directly) isn't this something you missed in your analysis:

And with him (Paul) performed the work of an evangelist (gospel writer)

gly
Clearly that makes clear that as Irenaeus lays out the chronology of Luke and Paul's working together (corresponding with Acts 28/2 Timothy 4 = Paul residing in Rome for two years) Irenaeus says that Luke and Paul collaborated on a gospel.

[Secret Alias]

Really you can't honestly see why I equate evangelist with gospel writer? Have you looked to see if anyone in antiquity was called an evangelist besides a gospel writer?

[TedM]

No why should I have looked for that? You are the one making the claim. Why didn't you explain something that nobody should logically consider upfront instead of banging your head against a wall in incredulity? I would be quite surprised to discover that such a broad term (nowadays) would have such a specific restriction in antiquity. The idea to look for that didn't even occur to me for that reason. If you are right are you now saying that Irenaeus thought that both Luke and Paul wrote a gospel? That would be the logical conclusion based on your claim of their definitions...

[Secret Alias]

You're not even trying. The manner in which Paul's "my gospel" = Luke's gospel is acknowledged by all Church Fathers. It is never quite explained fully. Irenaeus was the first to attempt explaining it. We are examining it now. It is developed against the idea that Paul alone wrote the gospel as a mystery gospel or secret gospel (an idea that resurfaces in Prescription Against the Heretics). In either case this notion of Paul as evangelist is usually associated with the Marcionites. Luke's role was a specifically Catholic tradition. It was denied by those outside the Great Church

[TedM]

Your 'evangelist' theory is IMO the most promising idea from you on this thread so far. If you want to flesh it out. Otherwise I've lost interest because none of the other points you've made work for me in the slightest. It looks to me like Irenaeus clearly said that the heretics (Marcionites, I assume) were claiming stuff that wasnt in GLuke and attributing it to Paul. I know you question the truth in that, but I'm still looking for a strong argument in support. The chronology of the OP IMO is a lot stronger against Lukan priority than for it. So what else do you have? It's GOT to be a lot better than that.

[Secret Alias]

Your 'evangelist' theory is IMO

It's not a theory. It would be helpful if you realized the Hebrew context of the terminology = mevasser. The Church Fathers as far as I know only use 'evangelist' to mean 'gospel writer.' They don't mean this guy:



You always tend to 'lose interest' when you realize the limitations of your knowledge. It's a bad trait.

[Secret Alias]

Sense on the distinction in the Church Fathers - https://books.google.com/books?id=w3tCA ... 22&f=false

[Secret Alias]

It is interesting that in the Catholic canon the terminology is used very different:

Acts 21:8 On the next day we departed and went to Caesarea. There we went into the house of Philip the evangelist (εὐαγγελιστοῦ), who was one of the seven, and stayed with him.
Ephesians 4:11 And it was he who gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists (εὐαγγελιστάς), the pastors and teachers,
2 Timothy 4:5 But you, be clear-minded in everything. Suffer evil. Do the work of an evangelist (εὐαγγελιστοῦ). Complete your ministry.

But then again look at the sources - they are very late texts. Acts doesn't reference gospel writing at all. Ephesians and 2 Timothy are pseudo-Pauline. Still it is interesting. Thanks for making me look at that.