Roger Pearse Finds a Cento Poem Used as a Magical Incantation

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Posts: 2833
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Roger Pearse Finds a Cento Poem Used as a Magical Incantation

Post by DCHindley » Fri Oct 16, 2020 11:59 am

This has come up before.

See Hans Dieter Betz, ed, The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation-Including the Demotic Spells (1986)

A tongue in cheek 4/20/2016 English reproduction of PGM VII. 1-148 in table format is to be found here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2298&p=51398&hilit= ... ice#p51398

Nobody invented it, just found it like I did. There are bad scans of Betz's book to be found on the internet, but I based this on the hardcover book.

DCH (taking my union mandated 15 minute break a little later than "norble" today, boss)

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 12516
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Roger Pearse Finds a Cento Poem Used as a Magical Incantation

Post by Secret Alias » Fri Oct 16, 2020 2:16 pm

I wasn't aware it had come up before. I thought it was worth pointing out how misinterpreted AH 1.9.4 is. The Valentinians are not accused of writing homerocentoes. 1.8.1 makes mention of the mosaic of Christ the king which has its stones moved to make the king look like a fox or dog.
By transferring passages, and dressing them up anew, and making one thing out of another, they succeed in deluding many through their wicked art in adapting the oracles of the Lord to their opinion
The reference to lordly logia certainly sounds like Papias. Note also the parallels with the reference to Mark not having things in the right order. But Irenaeus segues in another direction completely:
In like manner do these persons patch together old wives' fables, and then endeavour, by violently drawing away from their proper connection, words, expressions, and parables whenever found, to adapt the oracles of God to their baseless fictions. We have already stated how far they proceed in this way with respect to the interior of the Pleroma.
I can't help but get the feeling that Irenaeus himself is 'gluing' something said by Papias to those who misinterpret the gospel of John (the Valentinians). It's almost as if the authority of Papias and his criticism of the gospel of Mark is established. The arguments made against Mark are not redirected against the Valentinians who misinterpret John.

This is especially significant with reference to your own discussion of the Gospel of Mark. I wonder - and this is pretty far out there I admit - whether Irenaeus is recycling an argument made by Papias against Mark (even Secret Mark) and applying it to his/the newly fashioned gospel of John in order to give it (the gospel of John) a pedigree a lineage.

Post Reply