Charinus the Beloved Disciple

[Joseph D. L.]

I once read in a book I can't find that argued "Charinus" is derived from the Greek for beloeved, favoured. Is this at all true/possible?

He also tried to say Cerinthus was a derivative of Charinus too. I wish I could find that book.

[Ben C. Smith]

I once read in a book I can't find that argued "Charinus" is derived from the Greek for beloeved, favoured. Is this at all true/possible?

I think Χαρίνος derives from χάρις ("grace," "gift," "beauty").

He also tried to say Cerinthus was a derivative of Charinus too. I wish I could find that book.

That sounds highly dubious to me. Κήρινθος. Wrong consonants. Besides, κήρινθος already has another meaning. Refer also to this article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/283989?seq=1.

[Joseph D. L.]

I once read in a book I can't find that argued "Charinus" is derived from the Greek for beloeved, favoured. Is this at all true/possible?

I think Χαρίνος derives from χάρις ("grace," "gift," "beauty").

Thanks as always. I did manage to find the book where I read this from.

https://books.google.com/books?id=oYLGA ... ed&f=false

His main contention was with how previous writer was comparing it to Nordic legends

He didn't say anything about Cerinthus. I don't know where I got from.

He also tried to say Cerinthus was a derivative of Charinus too. I wish I could find that book.

That sounds highly dubious to me. Κήρινθος. Wrong consonants. Besides, κήρινθος already has another meaning. Refer also to this article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/283989?seq=1.

I remember reading Cerinthus in The Illiad. It was the name of a city. (Robert Fagles translation, btw).

[Ben C. Smith]

I once read in a book I can't find that argued "Charinus" is derived from the Greek for beloeved, favoured. Is this at all true/possible?

I think Χαρίνος derives from χάρις ("grace," "gift," "beauty").

Thanks as always. I did manage to find the book where I read this from.

https://books.google.com/books?id=oYLGA ... ed&f=false

Okay, that guy is dragging it through the Latin: carus. Honestly, I have wondered before whether there is a connection between "charity" and that whole line of words (including carus), on the one hand, and χάρις, on the other. But I do not have anything in hand telling me it is so.

[Joseph D. L.]

One thing that I have always found bazaar about John, other than the redundant endings, is:

John 20:30-31

Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

///

John 21:24-25

This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.

These verses seem to give the impression that there are more books written about Jesus and his acts. Obviously, we know that there are literal dozens of such texts.

The wording of 21:20-25 gives the impression that the writer is the "beloved disciple", the one who is not to die until Jesus returns. (Or comes, technically).

Set that aside for a moment.

Leucius Charinus, a man who, as far as is known, was the author of various romances about the disciples. What makes this character baffling is that he shares the conjoined name of two men from the Gospel of Nicodemus. This particular text is intriguing because it involves a figure who is only in one other Gospel, being John. (And Epiphanius said that Leucius was a follower of John: "For they were often contradicted by St. John and his friends, Leucius ") And just to add to the confusion, many early Christians rejected Johannine texts as being the work of Cerinthus. So what exactly is going on here?

Throwing all logic and good sense out the window for a minute, I'm going to use Bugge's interpretation of Leucius Charinus being derived from lentus carus, which would give us clinging dear one, which isn't too far removed from ὁ μαθητὴς ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ Ἰησοῦς, disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, otherwise, beloved disciple.

Cerinthus would be a misattribution. After all, Epiphanius seems confused on the matter of Cerithus and Merinthus, going so far as to call them the same person in one instance. Cerithus's theology is not that different from what's found in the Acts Romances; he is already accused of composing texts attributed to John; and John has a friendship with someone who is known to have written essentially early Christian fan fiction.

Okay, getting back to John. Why are there two endings??? What does this do for the Gospel of John???

Well, let's examine this. There is a difference between the two that might hold the key.

20:30-31 is concerned with making Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God , while 21:24-25 seems to be indifferent to that, being more concerned with his acts.

And what's more we can pin something else here too. Let's put Luke 1:1-4 and John 20:30-31

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

///

Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

The difference between John 20:30-31 and 21:24-25 is that it is only the latter where the "beloved disciple" names himself (This is the disciple). The former maintains the scholarly approach set out in Luke 1:1-4.

So? you be asking. Alright. The real meat and potatoes is Codex Fuldensis, a copy of the Diatessaron. Whereas all other known copies (at least that I know of) begin with John 1:1, Codex Fuldensis begins with Luke 1:1-4, minus the greeting to Theophilus. Stranger still, only verses from John 20 are present, the last included from John 20:21, "Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.”. Nothing from chapter 21 is included in Codex Fuldensis. This leans strongly to the side of the "beloved disciple" portions, as well as chapter 21 in its entirety, as the fraudulent additions and redaction.

This explains why Cerinthus was being accused of composing Johannine texts despite supposedly having a copy of Matthew in Hebrew, and why John had such an aversion to him (the infamous bath house scene at Ephesus). All of these are later traditions used to explain away that Cerinthus and Leucius Charinus (who was never called the latter until much later) were the same figure; that he stole and reedited a text belonging to John, penciling himself in as the beloved disciple, and hell, maybe even Polycarpus (ch. 15), and creating various other texts about the disciples. Someone gets a hold of this, doesn't know what to make of it, and a man named Lucian sends him a copy he's corrected.

!!!



In all seriousness though, the above does sound too far out there, I'll admit, and I have no way of proving any it. Maybe there is something to Tim Claason's old proposal of Mark and Revelation being the texts Cerinthus had, and thus explaining the character of "John Mark" (in which case, I owe George Hall an apology, as I was vehemently against it when he brought it up and was rather rude to him).

Just a thought experiment.

[Ben C. Smith]

Stranger still, only verses from John 20 are present, the last included from John 20:21, "Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.”. Nothing from chapter 21 is included in Codex Fuldensis.

I wish that were true! It would help me out in various ways. But most of John 21 is included in Fuldensis, starting at Ranke's chapter CLXXX.

[Joseph D. L.]

Stranger still, only verses from John 20 are present, the last included from John 20:21, "Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.”. Nothing from chapter 21 is included in Codex Fuldensis.

I wish that were true! It would help me out in various ways. But most of John 21 is included in Fuldensis, starting at Ranke's chapter CLXXX.

And this is why sensationalism is dangerous.

In my defense I was going off what I read in a book about Codex Fuldensis and it mentioned nothing about chapter 21. Coupled with my inability to read Latin, I ended up making a huge blunder. Apologies.

[Joseph D. L.]

Here's Xoroaster's take on the issue of the double endings and how it relates to Gospel of Nicodemus:

One thing I want to make a note of is the character of Nicodemus. Unlike the other disciples, Nicodemus is given a special place. He is singularly visited by Jesus wherein Jesus reveals mysteries to him that he does not disclose to the other disciples, only he defends Jesus when he is being accosted by the Pharisees, and he is responsible for helping Joseph of Arimathea with Jesus's berial.

Could the answer likely be found in the accounts of Lazarus?

Then Jesus, deeply moved again, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” Martha, the sister of the dead man, said to him, “Lord, by this time there will be an odor, for he has been dead four days.” Jesus said to her, “Did I not tell you that if you believed you would see the glory of God?” So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me.” When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.” The man who had died came out, his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.”

///

Many of the Jews therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what he did, believed in him, but some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. So the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered the council and said, “What are we to do? For this man performs many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.” But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. 53 So from that day on they made plans to put him to death.

///

His disciples did not understand these things at first, but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things had been written about him and had been done to him. The crowd that had been with him when he called Lazarus out of the tomb and raised him from the dead continued to bear witness. The reason why the crowd went to meet him was that they heard he had done this sign. So the Pharisees said to one another, “You see that you are gaining nothing. Look, the world has gone after him.”

It is these people who witnessed Jesus's raising of Lazarus that fully understand who and what he is and believe. Also notice that the author has the disciples still ignorant and not understanding, in contrast to the crowd, those who bore witness to Lazarus. Nicodemus means victory of/for the people.

Alright. All well and good. Big deal.

Now take a look at Gospel of Nicodemus with that in mind.

These are the divine and holy mysteries which we saw and heard, even I, Karinus, and Leucius: but we were not suffered to relate further the rest of the mysteries of God, according as Michael the archangel strictly charged us, saying: Ye shall go with your brethren unto Jerusalem and remain in prayer, crying out and glorifying the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, who hath raised you from the dead together with him: and ye shall not be speaking with any man, but sit as dumb men, until the hour come when the Lord himself suffereth you to declare the mysteries of his god head. But unto us Michael the archangel gave commandment that we should go over Jordan unto a place rich and fertile, where are many which rose again together with us for a testimony of the resurrection of Christ the Lord. For three days only were allowed unto us who rose from the dead, to keep the passover of the Lord in Jerusalem with our kindred (parents) that are living for a testimony of the resurrection of Christ the Lord: and we were baptized in the holy river of Jordan and received white robes, every one of us. And after the three days, when we had kept the passover of the Lord, all they were caught up in the clouds which had risen again with us, and were taken over Jordan and were no more seen of any man. But unto us it was said that we should remain in the city of Arimathaea and continue in prayer.

These be all things which the Lord bade us declare unto you: give praise and thanksgiving (confession) unto him, and repent that he may have mercy upon you. Peace be unto you from the same Lord Jesus Christ which is the Saviour of us all. Amen.

And when they had finished writing all things in the several volumes of paper they arose; and Karinus gave that which he had written into the hands of Annas and Caiaphas and Gamaliel; likewise Leucius gave that which he had written into the hands of Nicodemus and Joseph. And suddenly they were transfigured and became white exceedingly and were no more seen. But their writings were found to be the same (lit. equal), neither more nor less by one letter.

And when all the synagogue of the Jews heard all these marvelous sayings of Karinus and Leucius, they said one to another: Of a truth all these things were wrought by the Lord, and blessed be the Lord, world without end, Amen. And they went out all of them in great trouble of mind, smiting their breasts with fear and trembling, and departed every man unto his own home.

Lazarus and the people are replaced with Leucius and Charinus, two men who were resurrected with Jesus, and whose respective accounts do not stray in anyway from one another. Furthermore, the two are said to have written a copious amount, filling "several volumes of paper." Is this a later attempt to explain certain traditions that sprung up around Leucius Charinus? More to the point, could Leucius Chrinus have been responsible for the ending of John 21:20-25?