Early to mid 2nd c. works on Christianity missing from our forum's website

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1134
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by rakovsky » Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:47 am

Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:14 am
rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:04 am
1. That the anti-Marcionite work was written in 193 AD, and that work says Abercius talked with him "a very long time ago" (hence long before 193 AD)
2. And that the inscription of Abercius was "made shortly before his death" (that Wikipedia says was in 167 AD)
3. And cites Lightfoot as saying that the Abercius in question flourished under M.Aurelius (mid 2nd century) and went to Rome in 163
Where does this date come from? What is it based on?

Why do you believe it?
Peter,
I think you are casting doubt on the date of his death and statement #2. OK, I haven't researched his date of death.

Still, don't two other statements on the ECW that indicate the date suggest that it was written in the mid second century AT THE EARLIEST?

I don't understand at all your logic that:
"Because this anonymous anti-Marcionite work was written ca. 193 CE, the inscription of Abercius (made shortly before his death) must be dated between this year and 216 CE, the year of Alexander's epitaph."

What is it about the anti-Marcionite work of 193 that suggests that Abercius' inscription must have been written AFTER 193?

The Anti-marcionite work says that Abercius talked with him a "very long time ago". It never says that Abercius had not made the inscription yet or even that Abercius was still alive in 193.

Don't the ECW's statements and facts lead one to the conclusion that AT THE EARLIEST, Abercius could have made the inscription in the 160's AD when he was still "flourishing", soon after his trip to Rome in 163 AD, and "very long" before the anti-marcionite work of 193 AD?

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5359
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by Peter Kirby » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:11 am

rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:47 am
Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:14 am
rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:04 am
1. That the anti-Marcionite work was written in 193 AD, and that work says Abercius talked with him "a very long time ago" (hence long before 193 AD)
2. And that the inscription of Abercius was "made shortly before his death" (that Wikipedia says was in 167 AD)
3. And cites Lightfoot as saying that the Abercius in question flourished under M.Aurelius (mid 2nd century) and went to Rome in 163
Where does this date come from? What is it based on?

Why do you believe it?
Peter,
I think you are casting doubt on the date of his death and statement #2. OK, I haven't researched his date of death.
That was the only thing that would indicate that ECW is “wrong,” so why haven’t you “researched it” before making that claim? Is the Wikipedia that credible a source?
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5359
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by Peter Kirby » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:19 am

rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:04 am
[*]That the anti-Marcionite work was written in 193 AD, and that work says Abercius talked with him "a very long time ago" (hence long before 193 AD)
You should probably read the relevant evidence on this anti-Montanist work before pontificating.
rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:04 am
I don't understand at all your logic that:
"Because this anonymous anti-Marcionite work was written ca. 193 CE, the inscription of Abercius (made shortly before his death) must be dated between this year and 216 CE, the year of Alexander's epitaph."

What is it about the anti-Marcionite work of 193 that suggests that Abercius' inscription must have been written AFTER 193?
The Anti-marcionite work says that Abercius talked with him a "very long time ago". It never says that Abercius had not made the inscription yet or even that Abercius was still alive in 193.
Wrong. You are wrong because you have no clue what the truth is, yet see fit to speculate in all-too-certain terms.

Eusebius quotes from the beginning of this text:

Church History, 5.16.3
3. He commences his work in this manner:
Having for a very long and sufficient time, O beloved Avircius Marcellus, been urged by you to write a treatise against the heresy of those who are called after Miltiades, I have hesitated till the present time, not through lack of ability to refute the falsehood or bear testimony for the truth, but from fear and apprehension that I might seem to some to be making additions to the doctrines or precepts of the Gospel of the New Testament, which it is impossible for one who has chosen to live according to the Gospel, either to increase or to diminish.
Q.E.D., rakovsky.

Still alive at the time.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1134
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by rakovsky » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:33 am

Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:11 am
rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 9:47 am
Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:14 am
rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:04 am
1. That the anti-Marcionite work was written in 193 AD, and that work says Abercius talked with him "a very long time ago" (hence long before 193 AD)
2. And that the inscription of Abercius was "made shortly before his death" (that Wikipedia says was in 167 AD)
3. And cites Lightfoot as saying that the Abercius in question flourished under M.Aurelius (mid 2nd century) and went to Rome in 163
Where does this date come from? What is it based on?

Why do you believe it?
Peter,
I think you are casting doubt on the date of his death and statement #2. OK, I haven't researched his date of death.
That was the only thing that would indicate that ECW is “wrong,” so why haven’t you “researched it” before making that claim? Is the Wikipedia that credible a source?
Peter, the Wikipedia date is not the only issue. I don't see any fact at all in the ECW that limits the earliest date of writing to 193 AD.

The ECW says that Avercius talked with the anonymous writer "very long" before 193, that Avercius flourished sometime during Marcus Aurelius' rule (161-180 AD), and that he visited Rome in 163 AD. In fact, if you suppose that he made his inscription not long after returning from Rome (as IIRC some do), you would put the earliest date of writing at 163 AD.

The ECW says:
"Because this anonymous anti-Marcionite work was written ca. 193 CE, the inscription of Abercius (made shortly before his death) must be dated between this year and 216 CE, the year of Alexander's epitaph."

What is it about the anti-Marcionite work that could make someone think that Avercius could not have written the inscription yet?


The work never mentions Avercius' inscription. If anything, the facts on the ECW page suggests to me that the inscription was most likely written by Avercius a "long time" before 193, when Avercius talked with the author and when he was still "flourishing" under M.Aurelius (161-180).

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1134
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by rakovsky » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:42 am

Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:19 am
rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:04 am
[*]That the anti-Marcionite work was written in 193 AD, and that work says Abercius talked with him "a very long time ago" (hence long before 193 AD)
You should probably read the relevant evidence on this anti-Montanist work before pontificating.
The ECW page though quotes the Greek:
"In this treatise the writer addresses Avircius Marcellus as a person of authority, and states that Avircius had urged him a very long time ago (εκ πλειστου οσου και ικανωτατου ξρονου) to write on the subject."

rakovsky wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:04 am
I don't understand at all your logic that:
"Because this anonymous anti-Marcionite work was written ca. 193 CE, the inscription of Abercius (made shortly before his death) must be dated between this year and 216 CE, the year of Alexander's epitaph."

What is it about the anti-Marcionite work of 193 that suggests that Abercius' inscription must have been written AFTER 193?
The Anti-marcionite work says that Abercius talked with him a "very long time ago". It never says that Abercius had not made the inscription yet or even that Abercius was still alive in 193.
Wrong. You are wrong because you have no clue what the truth is, yet see fit to speculate in all-too-certain terms.

Eusebius quotes from the beginning of this text:

Church History, 5.16.3
3. He commences his work in this manner:
Having for a very long and sufficient time, O beloved Avircius Marcellus, been urged by you to write a treatise against the heresy of those who are called after Miltiades, I have hesitated till the present time, not through lack of ability to refute the falsehood or bear testimony for the truth, but from fear and apprehension that I might seem to some to be making additions to the doctrines or precepts of the Gospel of the New Testament, which it is impossible for one who has chosen to live according to the Gospel, either to increase or to diminish.
Q.E.D., rakovsky.

Still alive at the time.
OK, it sounds like the anonymous writer is addressing a then-living Avercius and not addressing him in heaven.
How does Avercius being alive in 193 mean that Avercius could not have already written the inscription?

Here is how it looks to me:
163 AD: Avercius visited Rome. (SOURCE: ECW). Maybe he was 20 years old then?
163 or later: Maybe he returned and then wrote the inscription?
193: The Anonymous writer says Avericius urged him a long time ago to write a treatise. Maybe Avercius was 53 years old in 193 AD?

I don't see any information here that would lead one to think that the inscription couldn't be written BEFORE 193 AD. He never says Avercius did or did not write an inscription.

What about the Marcionite work could possibly lead anyone to think that Avercius COULD NOT have already made an inscription someplace?

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5359
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by Peter Kirby » Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:53 am

Lol. You started out by saying that ECW is wrong.

Now you are just grasping at greasy straws.

If you are stubborn enough to believe the inscription was written a long time before the person’s death, that is your personal choice.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
rakovsky
Posts: 1134
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 8:07 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by rakovsky » Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:18 am

Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:53 am
Lol. You started out by saying that ECW is wrong.

If you are stubborn enough to believe the inscription was written a long time before the person’s death, that is your personal choice.
Yes, it seems there is zero basis for limiting the Avercius inscription to 193 AD.
The Marcionite treatise suggests that Avercius was still alive (unless it was a posthumous dedication) in 193, not whether the inscription was written before or after the treatise.

All I am asking really is why do you pick 193 as the earliest date, Peter?

Let's say he died in 193 but he wrote it in 192? That would still be a date earlier before 193.

What is "stubborn" about thinking that he wrote it AT THE EARLIEST in 163-180, during which ECW says that Avercius "flourished"? It seems like even a probable date.

My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5359
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by Peter Kirby » Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:26 am

It’s an epitaph.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5359
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by Peter Kirby » Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:29 am

Anti-Montanist treatise, not ‘Marcionite’ treatise.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5359
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: 101-150 AD works on Christianity listed by theme

Post by Peter Kirby » Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:35 am

The Wikipedia is wrong. Their article deserves the scrutiny here.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

Post Reply