Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:09 pm

Irenaeus AH 1.7.5
5. They conceive, then, of three kinds of men, spiritual, material, and animal, represented by Cain, Abel, and Seth. These three natures are no longer found in one person, but constitute various kinds [of men]. The material goes, as a matter of course, into corruption. The animal, if it make choice of the better part, finds repose in the intermediate place; but if the worse, it too shall pass into destruction. But they assert that the spiritual principles which have been sown by Achamoth, being disciplined and nourished here from that time until now in righteous souls (because when given forth by her they were yet but weak), at last attaining to perfection, shall be given as brides to the angels of the Saviour, while their animal souls of necessity rest for ever with the Demiurge in the intermediate place. And again subdividing the animal souls themselves, they say that some are by nature good, and others by nature evil. The good are those who become capable of receiving the [spiritual] seed; the evil by nature are those who are never able to receive that seed.
Tertullian AV 28
I shall now gather from various sources material to demonstrate what they have decreed about the classification of the human race. They say that from the beginning man had a threefold nature which was nevertheless united in Adam. After Adam they divide up man's nature according to its individual characteristics. They have found an opportunity to explicate this sort of division in the posterity of Adam himself, a posterity,
divided into three different moral characters. Cain, Abel, Seth, who can be called the well-springs of the human race, distribute to this race their qualities of character and the results of how they were judged.
Specifically, the Valentinians assign the earthy nature, regressed from salvation, to Cain; the soul-like nature, balanced between good and evil prospects, they place in Abel; the spirit-like, prejudged fit for salvation, they find in Seth. Consequently they separate souls into two groups, good or evil, according to their nature, earthy from Cain, soul-like from Abel. They distinguish only two groups because they put the spirit-like nature from Seth on a different level arbitrarily and call it grace, not a nature, a grace which Achamoth rains from above into good souls, i.e., souls of the soul-like category. (Only into these, for the earthy kind, i.e., evil, can never attain salvation. They define this earthy nature as unchangeable and incorrigible by nature.) Therefore, this grain of a spirit-like seed is insignificant and small when it is sown, but because of its training, the worthiness of these souls grows and advances--as we said above--until they become so outstanding that the Demiurge, ignorant at that time (i.e. before Christ's appearance)of the cause, values them highly. From their number he habitually chose kings and priests. Even now if they attain a full and complete knowledge of these idiocies, they will gain certain salvation, a salvation which is indeed due them since they are born into the spirit-like state.
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:17 pm

Irenaeus AH 1.6.2 - 4

2. Animal men, again, are instructed in animal things; such men, namely, as are established by their works, and by a mere faith, while they have not perfect knowledge. We of the Church, they say, are these persons. Wherefore also they maintain that good works are necessary to us, for that otherwise it is impossible we should be saved. But as to themselves, they hold that they shall be entirely and undoubtedly saved, not by means of conduct, but because they are spiritual by nature. For, just as it is impossible that material substance should partake of salvation (since, indeed, they maintain that it is incapable of receiving it), so again it is impossible that spiritual substance (by which they mean themselves) should ever come under the power of corruption, whatever the sort of actions in which they indulged. For even as gold, when submersed in filth, loses not on that account its beauty, but retains its own native qualities, the filth having no power to injure the gold, so they affirm that they cannot in any measure suffer hurt, or lose their spiritual substance, whatever the material actions in which they may be involved.

3. Wherefore also it comes to pass, that the "most perfect" among them addict themselves without fear to all those kinds of forbidden deeds of which the Scriptures assure us that "they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." For instance, they make no scruple about eating meats offered in sacrifice to idols, imagining that they can in this way contract no defilement. Then, again, at every heathen festival celebrated in honour of the idols, these men are the first to assemble; and to such a pitch do they go, that some of them do not even keep away from that bloody spectacle hateful both to God and men, in which gladiators either fight with wild beasts, or singly encounter one another. Others of them yield themselves up to the lusts of the flesh with the utmost greediness, maintaining that carnal things should be allowed to the carnal nature, while spiritual things are provided for the spiritual. Some of them, moreover, are in the habit of defiling those women to whom they have taught the above doctrine, as has frequently been confessed by those women who have been led astray by certain of them, on their returning to the Church of God, and acknowledging this along with the rest of their errors. Others of them, too, openly and without a blush, having become passionately attached to certain women, seduce them away from their husbands, and contract marriages of their own with them. Others of them, again, who pretend at first. to live in all modesty with them as with sisters, have in course of time been revealed in their true colours, when the sister has been found with child by her [pretended] brother.

4. And committing many other abominations and impieties, they run us down (who from the fear of God guard against sinning even in thought or word) as utterly contemptible and ignorant persons, while they highly exalt themselves, and claim to be perfect, and the elect seed. For they declare that we simply receive grace for use, wherefore also it will again be taken away from us; but that they themselves have grace as their own special possession, which has descended from above by means of an unspeakable and indescribable conjunction; and on this account more will be given them.(6) They maintain, therefore, that in every way it is always necessary for them to practise the mystery of conjunction. And that they may persuade the thoughtless to believe this, they are in the habit of using these very words, "Whosoever being in this world does not so love a woman as to obtain possession of her, is not of the truth, nor shall attain to the truth. But whosoever being of(1) this world has intercourse with woman, shall not attain to the truth, because he has so acted under the power of concupiscence." On this account, they tell us that it is necessary for us whom they call animal men, and describe as being of the world, to practise continence and good works, that by this means we may attain at length to the intermediate habitation, but that to them who are called "the spiritual and perfect" such a course of conduct is not at all necessary. For it is not conduct of any kind which leads into the Pleroma, but the seed sent forth thence in a feeble, immature state, and here brought to perfection.
Tertullian AV 30
Because of these beliefs, they do not consider good works necessary for themselves, and they do not observe any calls of duty. They also avoid the necessity of being martyrs by any convenient quibble, for they say this rule of works has been prescribed for the soul-like seed in order that we might work out by our actions that salvation which we do not possess by virtue of our nature. We who have incomplete knowledge and who do not know Theletus (Perfect), have the mark, indeed, which belongs to abortive creatures (like their mother Achamoth). As for us--woe, if we step outside the yoke of discipline in any respect; woe, if we are sluggish in doing works of holiness or justification; woe, if we hope to confess our faith some where other than among the powers of this world, i.e., at the tribunal of the judges.For their part, they prove their noble birth by the looseness of their life and by their delight in sin. Achamoth in this way coddles her own, since she sinned and benefited by it. They have the rule (adopted for the purpose of honoring the higher pairs) of contemplating and engaging frequently in the sacrament of uniting with a "companion," namely, a woman. They consider a man perverse and a false son of truth if he does not, during his life on earth, love a woman and join himself to her. If so, what do the eunuchs do whom we see among them?
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Mar 27, 2020 7:28 am

I've been struggling to understand why the order has been altered AT THIS POINT. I think this demonstrates why Against the Valentinians is more original IN TERMS OF THE ORDER of the narrative. Seen from the perspective of AV THIS IS THE POINT Against Heresies changes the order of AV. Why? Look at the highlighted passages in red again:
they do not observe any calls of duty. They also avoid the necessity of being martyrs by any convenient quibble, for they say this rule of works has been prescribed for the soul-like seed in order that we might work out by our actions that salvation which we do not possess by virtue of our nature ... As for us--woe, if we step outside the yoke of discipline in any respect; woe, if we are sluggish in doing works of holiness or justification; woe, if we hope to confess our faith some where other than among the powers of this world, i.e., at the tribunal of the judges.
AV was clearly written at a time of great persecution. I know Moss and others deny that such a period existed but it is clearly attested in Celsus. AH on the other hand does not contain the reference to martyrdom but more importantly a Christian community run by a gnostic 'spiritual' elite who send out 'animal' martyrs for sacrifice.

Why does this matter?

Because it would appear that AV is the older treatise. Eusebius makes clear that Irenaeus's AH was written during a golden age for the Church. That's why there are no martyr references and more importantly the notion that the 'spiritual' gnostics ruled (i.e. were the bishops) over the animals in the Roman Church. If AH is the golden age, then AV - the core treatise which AH modified and put into the greater context of heresies - is before the golden age and specifically during the period of martyrdom i.e. the period marked by the martyrdom of the churches of Gaul etc.

What I notice is:
1. Hegesippus, the guy with all this info on a mythical Church in Jerusalem that derives from the descendants of Jesus, goes to Rome allegedly sees a gnostic community which engages in orgies c. 147 CE. Hegesippus's report was widely read and influential.
2. the original Greek text behind AV is written sometime before 180 CE (170 - 180 CE). It says, as we see here, the same thing, only it connects the sex (coitus) orgies to the specifically Valentinian doctrines of 'conjunction' (coetus) of aeons.
3. widely disseminating reports about Christian 'love feasts' (agape) and orgies.
4. Clement's letter to Theodore written regarding a secret gospel of Mark which has at its core 'naked with naked' as part of a mystery of conjunction (male and male). Hegesippus's Carpocratians are again the marked group. Origen says he's never met an actual member of the Carpocratian sect.
So this idea of libertine Christianity in Rome is established. Hegesippus just says 'there was a famous woman named Marcelina' who presided over this orgy cult. By the time of AV and to Theodore the orgies are connected with the leadership of the community in Rome and Alexandria. Yet when AH is written likely under Victor (c. 180 - 192 CE) this emphasis that the Roman leadership were perverted sex maniacs has been wiped from the text. I wonder why. We also see it with respect to Polycarp's meeting with Anicetus. The Roman leadership is now respected. Hegesippus's Roman episcopal succession list confirms that. But the original text behind AV clearly infers that the Roman leadership needs to be removed from power because they were a bunch of perverts.
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Mar 27, 2020 7:58 am

Irenaeus 1.7.1a
When all the seed shall have come to perfection, they state that then their mother Achamoth shall pass from the intermediate place, and enter in within the Pleroma, and shall receive as her spouse the Saviour, who sprang from all the AEons, that thus a conjunction may be formed between the Saviour and Sophia, that is, Achamoth. These, then, are the bridegroom and bride, while the nuptial chamber is the full extent of the Pleroma. The spiritual seed, again, being divested of their animal souls, and becoming intelligent spirits, shall in an irresistible and invisible manner enter in within the Pleroma, and be bestowed as brides on those angels who wait upon the Saviour. The Demiurge himself will pass into the place of his mother Sophia; that is, the intermediate habitation. In this intermediate place, also, shall the souls of the righteous repose;

Tertullian AV 31
Their opinions about the end of the world and the distribution of reward and punishment are left to discuss: when Achamoth has pressed out the mass of her seed and when she has begun to store it in her cellar, or (to change the metaphor) when she has carried it to the mill and then has hidden the flour in the leaven of salvation until she has gathered it all, then the end is very near. At first Achamoth herself will be moved from her position in the middle, i.e., from the second storey, to the penthouse, and she will be restored to the Pleroma. Immediately that glued-together Saviour receives her, as her bridegroom, of course; both together make a new pair. This is supposed to be the bridegroom mentioned in the Bible, with the Pleroma as bridal-chamber! You might think that the Julian laws are intervening, since there are these trips from place to place. Just like his mother, the Demiurge will then move from his seventh heaven into a higher place, into the now vacant apartments of his mother. Now he can know about her, even though he does not see her. But, if all these things had happened, he might have preferred to be in the dark about her forever.
Last edited by Secret Alias on Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Mar 27, 2020 7:59 am

Again I am struck by the idea that AV goes back to the original text even though there are signs that it is a summary or an epitome. It is natural to conclude a text on the beliefs of the Valentinians with what they say will happen to all of us at the end times.
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:25 am

Irenaeus 1.7.1b, 5
but nothing of an animal nature shall find admittance to the Pleroma. When these things have taken place as described, then shall that fire which lies hidden in the world blaze forth and bum; and while destroying all matter, shall also be extinguished along with it, and have no further existence. They affirm that the Demiurge was acquainted with none of these things before the advent of the Saviour.

... They conceive, then, of three kinds of men, spiritual, material, and animal, represented by Cain, Abel, and Seth. These three natures are no longer found in one person, but constitute various kinds [of men]. The material goes, as a matter of course, into corruption. The animal, if it make choice of the better part, finds repose in the intermediate place; but if the worse, it too shall pass into destruction. But they assert that the spiritual principles which have been sown by Achamoth, being disciplined and nourished here from that time until now in righteous souls (because when given forth by her they were yet but weak), at last attaining to perfection, shall be given as brides to the angels of the Saviour, while their animal souls of necessity rest for ever with the Demiurge in the intermediate place. And again subdividing the animal souls themselves, they say that some are by nature good, and others by nature evil. The good are those who become capable of receiving the [spiritual] seed; the evil by nature are those who are never able to receive that seed.
Tertullian AV 32
The human race has this fate: complete destruction for every soul stamped "earthy" or "material," because "all flesh is grass" (Isa. 40:6). We see that they think even the soul is mortal unless it finds salvation by faith. The souls of righteous men, namely ours, will be carried to the Demiurge
in the shelter of his middle region--we are thankful; we will be happy to be counted with our god from whom we received our soul-like origin. Nothing is admitted into the palace of the Pleroma except the spirit-like swarm of Valentinus. These men then, men destined to enter the Pleroma, are unclothed first; to be unclothed means to put aside the souls with which they are only apparently endowed. They return to the Demiurge these souls which they received from him. They become spirits entirely metaphysical, immune to restraint or detection; in this fashion they are received invisibly into the Pleroma-- secretly, if this is the way it is! What then? They are handed out to the angels who accompany Saviour. As sons, do you suppose? No. As valets perhaps? Not even this. As ghosts? I wish even this were the case! What, then, if you are not ashamed to say? As wives! For marriages they will play "Rape the Sabines" among themselves. This is the reward for being "spirit-like"; this is the prize for believing. These are proper little stories; for example, you, Marcus, or you, Gaius, at present bearded in this body and in this soul
a stern husband, father, grandfather, or great-grandfather-- certainly masculine enough
--then, in this harem of a Pleroma, by some angel you might be. . . ; by my silence I have already said it. Anyway perhaps you might give birth to some new aeon. In place of the usual torch and veil I imagine that famous mysterious fire will blaze out to solemnize the ceremony, and will devastate the entire universe, then be reduced to nothing, after it has incinerated everything. That will be the end of their myth. But I am certainly the rash one for betraying, even in jest, such a great mystery. I should be afraid that Achamoth, who wanted to be unrecognized even by her own son, may rage; that Theletus may become angry; that Fortunata may be irritated. But why worry? I am the Demiurge's man. It will be my fate to return after death to a place where there is no giving in marriage,where we are to be further clothed rather than unclothed (II Cor. 5)[/b]; where even if I were unclothed of my sex, I would be classified as an angel, neither male nor female. No one will do anything to me since he will not find me as male then.
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:29 am

The conclusion of AV is far more developed and clearly contains material that proves that the reported CONTEXT of the letter to Theodore (same sex bridal chamber rituals) was well-established.
“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
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Mar 27, 2020 10:16 am

Let's take a closer look at the specific language of AV:
humana vero gens in hoc exitus ibit: choicae et materialis notae totum in interitum quia omnis caro foenum. et anima mortalis apud illos nisi quae salutem fide invenerit. iustorum animae, id est nostrae, ad Demiurgum in medietatis receptacula transmittentur--agimus gratias, contenti erimus cum deo nostro deputaci qua census animalis. nihil in Pleromacis palatium admittitur nisi spiritale examen Valentini. [2] illic itaque primo despoliantur homines ipsi, id est interiores; despoliare est autem deponere animas quibus induti videbantur, easque Demiurgo suo reddent quas ab eo averterant. ipsi autem spiritus in totum fient intellectuales neque detentui neque conspectui obnoxii, atque ita invisibiliter in Pleroma recipiuntur. furtim si ita est. [3] quid deinde? angelis distribuentur satellitibus Soteris. in filios putas? non. sed in adparatores? ni istud quidem. sed in imagines? utinam vel hoc. in quid ergo si non pudet dicere? in sponsas! tunc illi sabinas raptas inter se de matrimoniis ludent. haec erat spiritalium merces, hoc praemium credendi. [4] fabulae tales utiles ut Marcus aut Gaius in hac carne barbatus et in hac anima severus maritus pater avus proavus--certe quod sufficit masculus--in nyphone Pleromatis ab angelo. . . tacendo iam dixi; et forsitan parias aliquem novissimum Aeonem. his nuptiis recte deducendis pro face et flammeo tunc credo ille ignis arcanus erumpet et universam substantiam depopulatus ipse quoque decineratis omnibus in nihilum finietur et nulla iam fabula. [5] sed ne ego temerarius qui tantum sacramentum etiam inludendo prodiderim. verendum mihi est ne Achamoth quae se nec filio agnitam voluit insaniet, ne Theletus irascatur, ne Fortunata acerbetur. et tamen homo sum Demiurgi; illuc habeo devertere ubi post excessum omnino non obnubitur, ubi superindui potius quam despoliari, ubi etsi despolior sexui meo, deputor angelis non angelus non angela; nemo mihi quicquam faciet quem nec tunc masculum inveniet.
1. the first thing I notice is that the name 'Valentinus' appears in the context of 'palace':
nihil in Pleromacis palatium admittitur nisi spiritale examen Valentini

Into the palace of the Pleroma nothing of the animal nature is admitted-nothing but the spiritual swarm of Valentinus
2. the naked with naked reference:
illic itaque primo despoliantur homines ipsi, id est interiores; despoliare est autem deponere animas quibus induti videbantur,

These men then, men destined to enter the Pleroma, are unclothed first; to be unclothed means to put aside the souls with which
they are only apparently endowed. They return to the Demiurge these souls which they received from him.[Riley]

There, then, the first process is the despoiling of men themselves, that is, men within the Pleroma. Now this despoiling consists of the putting off of the souls in which they appear to be clothed, which they will give back to their Demiurge as they had obtained them from him. [Holmes]

Là donc les hommes eux-mêmes, c'est-à-dire les hommes intérieurs, commencent par se dépouiller. Se dépouiller, c'est déposer les ames dont ils paraissaient revêtus, et ils rendront à leur Démiurgue celles qu'ils avaient tenues éloignées de lui [Genoude]

Dort werden die Menschen selber zunächst entkleidet, d. h. innerlich. Sich entkleiden heisst, die Seelen, womit sie bekleidet zu sein schienen, ablegen; sie werden dieselben dem Demiurgen zurückgeben, da sie sie ihm abwendig gemacht hatten [Kellner]
3. this marriage rite is 'secret'

furtim = like a thief

4. the naked men are given to the angels as brides.
angelis distribuentur satellitibus Soteris. in filios putas? non. sed in adparatores? ni istud quidem. sed in imagines? utinam vel hoc. in quid ergo si non pudet dicere? in sponsas!
First the 'men' appear at the beginning - homines - who are 'given to the angels' - angelis distribuentur - as 'wives' sponsas. Thus wherever the term 'female' 'bride' etc are used what are being described are not females according to the flesh but 'men' who have taken on the role of brides.

5. the bridal chamber imagery leads to the sexual imagery. The naked men who play the role of 'bride' will be raped presumably by the Valentinian mystagogues. But notice also 'Mark' is suddenly introduced as the originator of these sexualized 'stories' at the core of the mystery rites:
tunc illi sabinas raptas inter se de matrimoniis ludent. haec erat spiritalium merces, hoc praemium credendi. [4] fabulae tales utiles ut Marcus in nyphone Pleromatis ab angelo. . . tacendo iam dixi

For marriages they will play "Rape the Sabines" among themselves. This is the reward for being "spirit-like"; this is the prize for believing. These are proper little stories; for example, you, Marcus ... then, in this harem of a Pleroma, by some angel you might be. . . ; by my silence I have already said it. Anyway perhaps you might give birth to some new aeon.[Riley]

Then will they end their Sabine rapes with the sanction of wedlock. This will be the guerdon of the spiritual, this the recompense of their faith! Such fables have their use. Although but Marcus ... you may perhaps in the bridal-chamber of the Pleroma-I have already said so tacitly -even become the parent by an angel of some Aeon of high numerical rank
Clearly 'Mark' presides over a 'secret' mystery rite where naked men become brides of the aeons but are really being duped into being raped by men.

6. 'Mark clearly existed in the past, the originator of the mysteries. The mysteries continue to be practiced by 'Gaius' - presumably Gaius of Rome.
aut Gaius in hac carne barbatus et in hac anima severus maritus pater avus proavus--certe quod sufficit masculus
The point of stressing Gaius's masculinity (his beard - something which is well known in contemporary Christianity) is that he is clearly unlikely the 'feminine' initiates (eunuchs? see above). Again the naked men are being raped by the leaders of the Roman Church (identified as 'Valentinians').

7. a reference to 'fire' appearing in these naked 'bridal chamber' rites follows:
his nuptiis recte deducendis pro face et flammeo tunc credo ille ignis arcanus erumpet et universam substantiam depopulatus ipse quoque decineratis omnibus in nihilum finietur et nulla iam fabula. [5] sed ne ego temerarius qui tantum sacramentum etiam inludendo prodiderim.

In place of the usual torch and veil I imagine that famous mysterious fire will blaze out to solemnize the wedding, and will devastate the entire universe, then be reduced to nothing, after it has incinerated everything. That will be the end of their myth. But I am certainly the rash onefor betraying, even in jest, such a great mystery.
When 'Mark' is compared with Anaxilaus later in AH 13 it is because of his approximating "the craftiness of the magi" - i.e. fire worshipers. While the magic trick Mark uses to dupe his followers in what follows is not fire related In the parallel section of the Anonymous Treatise which mentions Anaxilaus his use of fire and water is specifically referenced:
And some of them try to argue that they only administer a sound and perfect, not as we, a mutilated and curtailed baptism, which they are in such wise said to designate, that immediately they have descended into the water, fire at once appears upon the water. Which if it can be effected by any trick, as several tricks of this kind are affirmed to be — of Anaxilaus — whether it is anything natural, by means of which this may happen, or whether they think that they behold this, or whether the work and magical poison of some malignant being can force fire from the water; still they declare such a deceit and artifice to be a perfect baptism, which if faithful men have been forced to receive, there will assuredly be no doubt but that they have lost that which they had.
8. the final statement here:
I should be afraid that Achamoth, who wanted to be unrecognized even by her own son, may rage; that Theletus may become angry; that Fortunata may be irritated. But why worry? I am the Demiurge's man. It will be my fate to return after death to a place where there is no giving in marriage, where we are to be further clothed rather than unclothed (II Cor. 5); where even if I were unclothed of my sex, I would be classified as an angel, neither male nor female. No one will do anything to me since he will not find me as male then.
should be self-explanatory by now. The heretical ritual features by contrast involves 'marriage' (sex), 'nakedness' and clear sexual roles (i.e. masculinity).
“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

Stuart
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Stuart » Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:38 pm

So all this goes back to trying to support your friend Morton Smith. Figures.

I think you do a terrific job and demonstrating the relationship between AH1 and AV, and AV being closer to the source and less of a "list" is probably the earlier of the two books, as copiests tend to lose some context and the repurpose of the material in AH suggests that. Since we know the material in Tertullian's name cannot be earlier for the most part than Septimus Severus in the early 3rd century -- and you observe that the version we have is edited, suggesting an even later date -- and the Irenaeus material appears to be further from the source, suggest also a later 3rd century date at least.

But you lose me when you try to fit in a timeline and tying into legend you seem to accept as history. Papias material, which we have via a well doctored compendium attributed to Eusubius (let's say the collection started under him, but the version we have is from the later middle ages), is focused on the Gospel order, arguing for Matthew priority over Mark. This is something that only mattered later, when the Gospels were bound together, a century and a half after Papias supposedly perished. That the letter to Theodore borrows from such tradition attributed to Papias suggests a late date as well.

But you push things forward not backward in an attempt to tie it to history. This is pure speculation on your part which accepts a mixed bag of legend as history with a bent to your preference and should be separated from the excellent observation of common source of the material to an unknown work about the Valentinians of the late 2nd century.

So I will praise the gem of that observation of common source and ignore the pile poo to follow about historical context.
“’That was excellently observed’, say I, when I read a passage in an author, where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, there I pronounce him to be mistaken.” - Jonathan Swift

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 11753
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is there a Relationship Between Papias's Discussion of Mark's Gospel and the First Book of Against Heresies?

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:46 pm

This work is preliminary to the question of Papias. I am preparing to subtract AV from AH to determine AH2 = the portion added to AV c. 180 - 195 CE. It only works if I can demonstrate AV is closer to the original.

The naked with naked stuff in AV 32 came by accident.

Next is to figure how old Gaius of Rome was.
“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

Post Reply