Books and letters of Paul.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Books and letters of Paul.

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Reading over the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs, there is this rather odd statement made by one of the captive Christians:

Saturninus the proconsul said: What are the things in your chest?

Speratus said: Books and epistles of Paul, a just man.

Now it can be generally agreed upon what is meant by epistles, whether they be of the Marcionites or the Pastoral redactions.

But what of the former inclusion of books? What books of Paul does/could he have?
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by Secret Alias »

The gospel
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Secret Alias wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:15 am The gospel
You see, that was my first thought and still remains so, but wouldn't this undermine the orthodoxy established belief that Paul didn't write a Gospel, only Matthew, Mark, Luke and John did, and later heretics like Marcion, Cerinthus, and Valentinus, corrupted them?

I'm also intrigued by the plural used, insinuating that it was more than one book.

And since they utilized the Pastorals, could this infer that they are actually talking about a different Paul--the one who wrote the Pastorals?
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by Secret Alias »

The Marcionites thought their "Apostle" wrote the ur gospel. It's not hard to see that Luke being the author of Paul's "my gospel" is a deliberate obscurification of Marcionite tradition. At bottom the ur tradition was that Paul DID NOT submit to the Jerusalem Church's written gospel hence in his ongoing dispute his subsequent condemnation of Peter
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3411
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by DCHindley »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:54 am Reading over the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs, there is this rather odd statement made by one of the captive Christians:

Saturninus the proconsul said: What are the things in your chest?

Speratus said: Books and epistles of Paul, a just man.

Now it can be generally agreed upon what is meant by epistles, whether they be of the Marcionites or the Pastoral redactions.

But what of the former inclusion of books? What books of Paul does/could he have?
The martyr seems to be equating "Books" with acknowledged "religious books," probably the Judean scriptures (Law & Prophets & Writings), although some of the Gospel books could be among these. The term "epistles of Paul" as a second category suggests edifying reading, not sacred lit., but I could easily be wrong about this.

They were martyred 17 July of 180 CE, so for them, there was no official NT canon except for some Gospel books. About the same time Irenaeus, located at Lugdunim in Gaul, was promoting a full set of authoritative Christian themed books that probably originated a couple decades earlier in Asia Minor (from Polycarp of Smyrna). I guess that the new sets of Christian books available in Gaul and Asia Minor, which included the full 13 letters of Paul in a "canonical" format, had not reached as far as Scilla in Numidia, waaaay out east beyond Libya. However, just the fact that they had the presence of mind to collect a record of the trial (official transcripts made available by bribes, publically posted announcements, and eyewitness accounts), which suggests an organized community, not just a bunch of weirdos. Christian communities, who meet in closed (invite only) worship sessions, would have been seen by the Romans as an illegal collegia.

The Judeans were the only ethnic community in the Roman sphere that had gained the right to meet in large numbers openly on a weekly basis for their worship. The fact that the Romans clamped down on the Christian community in Scilla suggests that by then the split between Christianity and Judaism was wide. Maybe the martyr was suggesting that they were actually a faction of Judaism (offering Judean scriptures as proof) with some of the epistles of Paul used in worship. I guess the judge was having none of that.

DCH
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by MrMacSon »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:54 am
Reading over the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs, there is this rather odd statement made by one of the captive Christians:

Saturninus the proconsul said: What are the things in your chest?

Speratus said: Books and epistles of Paul, a just man.

Now it can be generally agreed upon what is meant by epistles, whether they be of the Marcionites or the Pastoral redactions.

But what of the former inclusion of books? What books of Paul does/could he have?

It might pay to see what the original language -- Greek? -- has for 'books' ...


Secret Alias wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 6:29 am The Marcionites thought their "Apostle" wrote the ur gospel. It's not hard to see that Luke being the author of Paul's "my gospel" is a deliberate obscurification of Marcionite tradition. At bottom the ur tradition was that Paul DID NOT submit to the Jerusalem Church's written gospel hence in his ongoing dispute his subsequent condemnation of Peter

Perhaps 'gospel' - euangelion - εὐαγγέλιον - just means 'good news message' (i.e., not a text per se; or, not a key text.)


If Robert M Price is right about key Pauline texts being written by Marcion or around the time of Marcion (and about [some] being edited by the likes of Polycarp); and if Tyson, Beduhn, Vinzent, and Klinghardt are right about the synoptic gospels -especially urLuke and urMark - beginning with or being 'processed' via Marcion (or his community) then the genesis of most if not all of these key Christian texts would have been contemporary to each other [edited: 'would have been' replaced 'will be']




For posterity -

In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” – Romans 2:16

Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began…” – Romans 16:25

“Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:” – 2 Timothy 2:8


Paul is portrayed as the chosen vessel of the Lord as the apostle of the Gentiles/heathens -


Romans 11:13 -
For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office ...

Galatians 2:9 -
And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

Ephesians 3:1-7 (KVJ) -
1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given [to] me [for] you:

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

6 That the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power

2 Timothy 1:11 -
Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

1 Corinthians 3:10 -
According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon.

Last edited by MrMacSon on Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

MrMacSon wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 2:48 pmIt might pay to see what the original language -- Greek? -- has for 'books' ...
Not Greek. Latin. This is North Africa, after all:

Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs 12: 12 Saturninus proconsul dixit: “Quae sunt res in capsa vestra?” Speratus dixit: “Libri et epistulae Pauli viri iusti.” /Saturninus the governor said: “What sort of things do you have in that case of yours?” Speratus said: “Books and letters of Paul, a righteous man.”

Latin libri (plural). Same word that gives us the cognate "library."

There are two ways to read this line: books of Paul + epistles of Paul, and books in general + epistles of Paul. At least the second option does not force us to invent Pauline "books" (as opposed to epistles) out of thin air.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by MrMacSon »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:15 pm
MrMacSon wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 2:48 pmIt might pay to see what the original language -- Greek? -- has for 'books' ...
Not Greek. Latin. This is North Africa, after all:
Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs 12: 12 Saturninus proconsul dixit: “Quae sunt res in capsa vestra?” Speratus dixit: “Libri et epistulae Pauli viri iusti.” /Saturninus the governor said: “What sort of things do you have in that case of yours?” Speratus said: “Books and letters of Paul, a righteous man.”

Latin libri (plural). Same word that gives us the cognate "library."

There are two ways to read this line: books of Paul + epistles of Paul, and books in general + epistles of Paul. At least the second option does not force us to invent Pauline "books" (as opposed to epistles) out of thin air.
Cheers Ben. I presume libri would be collections of scrolls, parchments, and the like; maybe too early for codices (maybe some texts may have been called libro?)

n.b. “Libri et epistulae Pauli viri iusti” doesn't/wouldn't have punctuation (?)



Separate to those nuances^, this thread's discussion has raised for me the proposition that 'gospel' - euangelion - εὐαγγέλιον - could well have meant, at that time, 'good news' message or theology, as apposed to a text or collection of texts.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by Secret Alias »

But the Marcionites understood Paul wrote the first gospel. It's not entirely speculative. It follows from everything the Church Fathers say - and don't say - about the Marcionites. It's just that New Testament scholars are for the most part a bunch of nitwits with little imagination. Here is about as close as any scholar comes to realizing the situation:
As yet another characteristic of this Gospel, it may be mentioned that the influence of Paul over the mind of Luke is remarkably conspicuous in the spirit of it, in the very form of its expressions, and not infrequently, we may also venture to say in the selection of the materials of which it is composed. There is an old tradition, according to which Luke is said to have been little other than the amanuensis of Paul in the composition of it;* and it is sometimes alleged that when Paul refers to his Gospel, as he does in more than one of his epistles, the reference is to this Gospel, as drawn up by Luke, under his superintendence, if not dictation. It would appear that the old heretical sect of the Marcionites, who owned no apostolical authority but that of Paul, received this Gospel as his, and rejected all the others ; and, on this account also, it has been held and described to be the Pauline Gospel. But the preface of the Gospel expressly contradicts the idea of its Pauline authorship. https://books.google.com/books?id=c0xVA ... 22&f=false
It is so mind-numbingly frustrating this is the only guy who puts all the pieces of the puzzle together in the right way. Of course the Church Fathers never explicitly tell us the big secret. It renders their own lie about 'apostles' - a concept non-existent in Israelite religion (the Samaritans always refer to Moses as THE apostle like the Marcionite did their apostle - impotent.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Books and letters of Paul.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

MrMacSon wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:53 pm
Ben C. Smith wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:15 pm
MrMacSon wrote: Sun Sep 16, 2018 2:48 pmIt might pay to see what the original language -- Greek? -- has for 'books' ...
Not Greek. Latin. This is North Africa, after all:
Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs 12: 12 Saturninus proconsul dixit: “Quae sunt res in capsa vestra?” Speratus dixit: “Libri et epistulae Pauli viri iusti.” /Saturninus the governor said: “What sort of things do you have in that case of yours?” Speratus said: “Books and letters of Paul, a righteous man.”

Latin libri (plural). Same word that gives us the cognate "library."

There are two ways to read this line: books of Paul + epistles of Paul, and books in general + epistles of Paul. At least the second option does not force us to invent Pauline "books" (as opposed to epistles) out of thin air.
Cheers Ben. I presume libri would be collections of scrolls, parchments, and the like; maybe too early for codices (maybe some texts may have been called libro?)
(Nice guess, but the singular would be liber.)

It is an open question how early Christians began to use codices instead of scrolls. But yes, I think all of those things would be considered libri.
n.b. “Libri et epistulae Pauli viri iusti” doesn't/wouldn't have punctuation (?)
Not in antiquity, most likely.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply