It literally says, "what he first wrote to you in the beginning of the gospel." Its exact meaning is controversial.
Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
Re: Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
Ben, isn't https://archive.org/stream/BaillyDictio ... 2/mode/1up saying that this is a substantive?Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sat Feb 20, 2021 6:51 pmIt literally says, "what he first wrote to you in the beginning of the gospel." Its exact meaning is controversial.
I'm wondering about the -ον of πρωτον. Then again I just woke up
And a wondrous sentence indeed...
Re: Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
Hmmm quite interesting (thank you). I can see why.Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Sat Feb 20, 2021 6:51 pmIt literally says, "what he first wrote to you in the beginning of the gospel." Its exact meaning is controversial.
Neither here nor there, but this has piqued my interest as well.
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
No. This is an adjective which is often used adverbially, as well.mlinssen wrote: ↑Sun Feb 21, 2021 12:11 amBen, isn't https://archive.org/stream/BaillyDictio ... 2/mode/1up saying that this is a substantive?
-
- Posts: 3964
- Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
Ben wrote:Aleph One wrote: ↑Sat Feb 20, 2021 7:29 pm
Can anyone say whether the Greek of the 2nd line from Chapter 47 implies the start of the existence of the gospel, or just the start of Paul's preaching of it to them, perhaps? I think this is it:
τι πρωτον υμιν εν αρχη του ευαγγελιου εγραψεν
I think "Clement" was meaning by "in the beginning of the gospel": when he first preached to you (that would be in 50-52 for 2.5 years) because that time of preaching is connected with Apollos and Peter getting followers from Paul's converts soon after.It literally says, "what he first wrote to you in the beginning of the gospel." Its exact meaning is controversial.
That cannot be the start of the existence of the gospel (in Corinth) because in 1 Thessalonians (1:7-8, 2:2, 3:1) and Acts (16:12-17:16), Paul already had preached his gospel in Philippi & Thessalonica before reaching Athens.
Cordially, Bernard
Re: Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
You have a problem. There is no evidence that the supposed Clement knew of any letter to the Thessalonians. In addition the letter to the Thessalonians does not state the author preached a gospel c50-52 CE.Bernard Muller wrote: ↑Sun Feb 21, 2021 2:48 pmBen wrote:Aleph One wrote: ↑Sat Feb 20, 2021 7:29 pm
Can anyone say whether the Greek of the 2nd line from Chapter 47 implies the start of the existence of the gospel, or just the start of Paul's preaching of it to them, perhaps? I think this is it:
τι πρωτον υμιν εν αρχη του ευαγγελιου εγραψενI think "Clement" was meaning by "in the beginning of the gospel": when he first preached to you (that would be in 50-52 for 2.5 years) because that time of preaching is connected with Apollos and Peter getting followers from Paul's converts soon after.It literally says, "what he first wrote to you in the beginning of the gospel." Its exact meaning is controversial.
That cannot be the start of the existence of the gospel (in Corinth) because in 1 Thessalonians (1:7-8, 2:2, 3:1) and Acts (16:12-17:16), Paul already had preached his gospel in Philippi & Thessalonica before reaching Athens.
Cordially, Bernard
And may I remind you that Acts of the apostles does not state Saul or Paul wrote letters to anyone.
Re: Convince me that 1 Clement knew a Gospel
In order to determine what the supposed Clement knew about the Gospels one must first do some research on the character himself.
When did he live? When was he bishop of Rome?
A detailed search for Clement in Christian writings will show that he did not live at all so could not have been bishop of anywhere and wrote a letter to any Church.
The pattern is always consistent. Writings which appear to historicise Paul and his letters are always either forgeries, false attribution or fiction.
When did he live? When was he bishop of Rome?
A detailed search for Clement in Christian writings will show that he did not live at all so could not have been bishop of anywhere and wrote a letter to any Church.
The pattern is always consistent. Writings which appear to historicise Paul and his letters are always either forgeries, false attribution or fiction.