On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by Leucius Charinus »

I would like to discuss the idea and hypothesis that the Gnostic Gospels and Acts, much of the NT Apocrypha and indeed even some of the OT Apocrypha all represent a Greek literary reaction to the appearance of the Constantine Bible in the eastern Roman Empire, particularly at Alexandria, after Constantine's military supremacy of c.324/325 CE. I would like to point out here and now in order to avoid the usual emotional issues associated with discussion about "Christian Origins" that this idea is totally unrelated to the dating of the Canonical Books of the Christian Bible, and that we may variously assume that the Canonical NT Bible was originally authored in either the 1st or 2nd centuries of the common era. Let me repeat, I am perfectly happy to run with anyone's theory for the canonical books.

The idea to be explored and discussed and pump bullets into for testing here in this thread is that Irrespective of when the canonical NT books were authored, there was no authorship of the heretical Gnostic gospels and Acts, etc, etc, etc until after the Bible was raised from obscurity by Constantine, and made the "Holy Writ" at the basis of a centralised monotheistic religion of the Roman political empire. The idea is that the Gnostic material was a literary reaction to the appearance of the Greek NT Bible under the rule of Constantine, and that these "Gnostic" writings did not exist until c.325 CE.

The evidence relevant to this discussion, against the proposition that the Gnostic literature existed prior to 325 CE is twofold and may be summarised as:

(1) The "Church Fathers" mentioned these Gnostic gospels and Acts, etc
(2) Various datings of fragments of Gnostic Gospels to before 325 CE.

My response to these to commence the discussion is as follows:


(1) The "Church Fathers" mentioned these Gnostic gospels and Acts, etc

The contention is that these "mentions" were inserted into the books of "Early Christians" (who we may presume to be genuine) after Nicaea. The classic example highlighting my response here is the dating of the Clementine literature - the Recognitions and Homilies. Until recent times this literature was presumed to be from the 2nd or 3rd century because of mentions by Origen. However modern scholarship sees this literature as being written by an Arian after 330 CE. The idea is that there was a massive controversy over UNAUTHORISED books and the orthodoxy wrote up this controversy as though it had been a controversy over the books of the heretics during the earlier 2nd and 3rd centuries.



(2) Various datings of fragments of Gnostic Gospels to before 325 CE.

For a tabulation of papyri see: http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/A ... papyri.htm

The contention here is that these palaeographical assessments may be viewed as having error bounds (like C14) that accommodate a later (4th century) date.



REMEMBER

This discussion is about the chronology of the authorship of the non canonical books of the heretics, not about the chronology of the authorship of the canonical books of the orthodoxy.
A "cobbler of fables" [Augustine]; "Leucius is the disciple of the devil" [Decretum Gelasianum]; and his books "should be utterly swept away and burned" [Pope Leo I]; they are the "source and mother of all heresy" [Photius]
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by MrMacSon »

what do you mean by "NT Apocrypha" and "OT Apocrypha"?

Perhaps you could specify which 'Gnostic Gospels' & which 'Acts' you are referring to?
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by Leucius Charinus »

MrMacSon wrote:what do you mean by "NT Apocrypha"
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/apocrypha.html
... and "OT Apocrypha"?
The claim is not for all of the OT stuff:
http://wesley.nnu.edu/sermons-essays-bo ... -apocrypha

NOTE: Here is a list


1 Enoch
2 Enoch
3 Enoch
2 Baruch
3 Baruch
4 Baruch
3 Esdras
4 Esdras
5 Ezra
6 Ezra
3 Maccabees
4 Maccabees
5 Maccabees
6 Maccabees
7 Maccabees
8 Maccabees
1 Meqabyan
2 Meqabyan
3 Meqabyan
Adam Octipartite
Adjuration of Elijah
Apocalypse of Abraham
Apocalypse of Adam
Apocalypse of Elijah
Apocalypse of Ezekiel
Apocalypse of Sedrach
Apocalypse of the Seven Heavens
Apocalypse of Zephaniah
Apocryphon of Ezekiel
Apocryphon of Jacob and Joseph
Apocryphon of Melchizedek
Apocryphon of the Ten Tribes
Ascension of Moses
Assumption of Moses
Book of Assaf
Book of Noah
Cave of Treasures
Coptic Apocryphon of Jeremiah
Eldad and Modad
Enochic Book of Giants
Epistle of Rehoboam
Greek Apocalypse of Daniel
Greek Apocalypse of Ezra
History of Joseph
History of the Rechabites
Jannes and Jambres
Joseph and Aseneth
Jubilees
Ladder of Jacob
Letter of Aristeas
Life of Adam and Eve
Lives of the Prophets
Manual of Discipline
Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah
Odes of Solomon
Prayer of Jacob
Prayer of Joseph
Psalms of Solomon
Questions of Ezra
Revelation of Ezra
Sibylline Oracles
Signs of the Judgement
Sword of Moses
Testament of Abraham
Testament of Adam
Testament of Isaac
Testament of Jacob
Testament of Job
Testament of Moses
Testament of Solomon
Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs
Treatise of Shem
Vision of Ezra
Visions of Heaven and Hell
Words of Gad the Seer



Perhaps you could specify which 'Gnostic Gospels' & which 'Acts' you are referring to?

All of them.

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/A ... _Index.htm
Last edited by Leucius Charinus on Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A "cobbler of fables" [Augustine]; "Leucius is the disciple of the devil" [Decretum Gelasianum]; and his books "should be utterly swept away and burned" [Pope Leo I]; they are the "source and mother of all heresy" [Photius]
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by perseusomega9 »

Leucius Charinus wrote:
Perhaps you could specify which 'Gnostic Gospels' & which 'Acts' you are referring to?

All of them.

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/A ... _Index.htm
If your argument isn't over the dating of the 'canonical' writings, where do you date the Paul and Thecla stories with respect to the pastorals?
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by Leucius Charinus »

perseusomega9 wrote:
Leucius Charinus wrote:
Perhaps you could specify which 'Gnostic Gospels' & which 'Acts' you are referring to?

All of them.

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/A ... _Index.htm
If your argument isn't over the dating of the 'canonical' writings, where do you date the Paul and Thecla stories with respect to the pastorals?
The idea is to explore a date range like 325-335 CE not just for "The Acts of Paul" and/or "The Acts of Paul and Thecla" stories, but for all the noncanonical Acts and Gospels.


The Acts of Paul:

The chief and final literary citation is from Eusebius’ often cited Latin author Tertullian, in his De baptismo 17.5. This appears as the only early instance in which information is provided concerning an author of apocryphal writings. Note that the manuscripts which preserve Tertullian's De baptismo are quite late, the earliest being the 12th century Codex Trecensis.

As for those (women) who appeal to the falsely written Acts of Paul in order to defend the right of women to teach and to baptize,
let them know that the presbyter in Asia who produced this document, as if he could add something of his own to the prestige of Paul,
was removed from his office after he had been convicted and had confessed that he had done it out of love for Paul
.

The 4th century interpolation into Josephus, known as the "Testimonium Flavianum", is regarded by many as a critically positioned forgery, with respect to the history of the NT Canonical story. Likewise the "Testimonium Tertullianum", it is suggested, should be regarded as a critically positioned forgery, with respect to the history of the NT Apocryphal stories.


From this reference in Tertullian we are to infer that the Acts of Paul is from the 2nd century, and this is what has been inferred to date.


Jerome’s novel addition to the Christian tradition - that the author of the Acts of Paul wrote in the presence of the apostle John in the 1st century - is a plainly fraudulent misrepresentation, and has been soundly rejected by many academics.

The idea is that this controversial and unauthorised book - "The Acts of Paul" - was authored after the Bible was widely circulated, and not before.

When the victors wrote of the controversy of unauthorised books, and the books of the heretics, they downplayed the massive controversy after Nicaea by making it seem that there were orthodox and heretical books before Nicaea. IMO orthodoxy and heretics were created in the political sense only after the New Testament Bible was used in a political sense. Before 325 CE how many educated pagans can we have expected to have read the NT Bible? Very few, perhaps just one - Celsus.
Last edited by Leucius Charinus on Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A "cobbler of fables" [Augustine]; "Leucius is the disciple of the devil" [Decretum Gelasianum]; and his books "should be utterly swept away and burned" [Pope Leo I]; they are the "source and mother of all heresy" [Photius]
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by perseusomega9 »

And how does that dating explore the literary themes between the Paul/Thecla stories vs. the pastorals with respect to the larger Roman society?
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by Leucius Charinus »

perseusomega9 wrote:And how does that dating explore the literary themes between the Paul/Thecla stories vs. the pastorals with respect to the larger Roman society?
The larger Roman society was the Christian "Other" - we may as well call them "pagan".
They were used to their Homer, their Plato and their other stories.

If I may suggest a reading of this work

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=17x ... 22&f=false


Christianizing Homer : The Odyssey, Plato, and the Acts of Andrew: The Odyssey, Plato, and the Acts of Andrew

by Dennis R. MacDonald Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins Iliff School of Theology
Oxford University Press, 22 Mar 1994
This study focuses on the apocryphal Acts of Andrew (c. 200 CE), which purports to tell the story of the travels, miracles, and martyrdom of the apostle Andrew. Traditional scholarship has looked for the background of such writings in Jewish and Christian scriptures. MacDonald, however, breaks with that model and looks to classic literature for the sources of this story.

Specifically, he argues that the Acts represent an attempt to transform Greco-Roman myth into Christian narrative categories by telling the story of Andrew in terms of Homeric epic, in particular the Odyssey. MacDonald presents a point-by-point comparison of the two works, finding the resemblances so strong, numerous, and tendentious that they virtually compel the reader to consider the Acts a transformative "rewriting" of the epic. This discovery not only sheds valuable light on the uses of Homer in the early church but also significantly contributes to our understanding of the reception of Homer in the empire as a whole.

In general IMO, the idea is that the authors of the non canonical acts were pagans, writing their own unofficial stories.

Here are some quotes describing who mainstream opinion sees these "Gnostic authors" to be:

"Gnostic texts use parody and satire quite frequently ... making fun of traditional biblical beliefs"[April Deconick]

"heretics ... who were chiefly Gnostics ... imitated the books of the New Testament" [Catholic Encyclopaedia]

"enterprising spirits ... pretended Gospels full of romantic fables and fantastic and striking details, their fabrications were eagerly read and largely accepted as true by common folk who were devoid of any critical faculty and who were predisposed to believe what so luxuriously fed their pious curiosity." "the heretical apocryphists, composed spurious Gospels in order to trace backward their beliefs and peculiarities to Christ Himself." [Catholic Encyclopaedia]

"the fabrication of spurious Acts of the Apostles was, in general, to give Apostolic support to heretical systems, especially those of the many sects which are comprised under the term Gnosticism. The Gnostic Acts of Peter, Andrew, John, Thomas, and perhaps Matthew, abound in extravagant and highly coloured marvels, and were interspersed by long pretended discourses of the Apostles which served as vehicles for the Gnostic predications. The originally Gnostic apocryphal Acts were gathered into collections which bore the name of the periodoi (Circuits) or praxeis (Acts) of the Apostles, and to which was attached the name of a Leucius Charinus, who may have formed the compilation." [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
A "cobbler of fables" [Augustine]; "Leucius is the disciple of the devil" [Decretum Gelasianum]; and his books "should be utterly swept away and burned" [Pope Leo I]; they are the "source and mother of all heresy" [Photius]
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2817
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by Leucius Charinus »

In the Acts of Paul, Paul is wandering around in the wilderness and stumbles upon a talking lion who Paul promptly baptizes. At the conclusion of the story Paul is thrown to lions in the Colleseum and lo and behold he is protected by the very same lion. One good turn deserves another. Aesop - the Lion and the Mouse. But Paul is the mouse.
A "cobbler of fables" [Augustine]; "Leucius is the disciple of the devil" [Decretum Gelasianum]; and his books "should be utterly swept away and burned" [Pope Leo I]; they are the "source and mother of all heresy" [Photius]
Stephan Huller
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by Stephan Huller »

(a)The 4th century interpolation into Josephus, known as the "Testimonium Flavianum", is regarded by many as a critically positioned forgery, with respect to the history of the NT Canonical story.
(b) Likewise the "Testimonium Tertullianum", it is suggested, should be regarded as a critically positioned forgery, with respect to the history of the NT Apocryphal stories.
How does (b) follow from (a)? It sounds a lot like:

(a) I had sex with my wife therefore
(b) I had sex with your wife

How on earth do you make the leap from Eusebius added to Josephus to THEREFORE all references in Patristic literature which contradict Pete's fourth century conspiracy must also be interpolations. :banghead:
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: On dating the Gnostic literature after 325 CE

Post by perseusomega9 »

It's funny you mention MacDonald, because he places the pastorals in opposition to Paul/Thecla stories, whether written or oral, and he leans oral. His thesis also places them in 2nd century Rome as the catholic church was making the new religion acceptable to Roman sensibilities with respect to family order, slaves, and moderating the apocalypticism of the early church which shunned sexual (wife=>children) duties or general abstinence along with trying to fund the manumission of slaves, and caring for widows (converts or virgins).
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe
Post Reply