Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Eusebius has this notice about Bardasanes (fl. ca. 180), who had a large influence on Syria and the kingdom around Edessa (and was a Valentinian):

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250104.htm

1. In the same reign, as heresies were abounding in the region between the rivers, a certain Bardesanes, a most able man and a most skillful disputant in the Syriac tongue, having composed dialogues against Marcion's followers and against certain others who were authors of various opinions, committed them to writing in his own language, together with many other works. His pupils, of whom he had very many (for he was a powerful defender of the faith), translated these productions from the Syriac into Greek.

2. Among them there is also his most able dialogue On Fate, addressed to Antoninus, and other works which they say he wrote on occasion of the persecution which arose at that time.

3. He indeed was at first a follower of Valentinus, but afterward, having rejected his teaching and having refuted most of his fictions, he fancied that he had come over to the more correct opinion. Nevertheless he did not entirely wash off the filth of the old heresy.

MrMacSon wrote:Gaul/Lyon

Africa/Carthage

Written ca. 175-180, these documents regarding martyrs attest to the regions of Gaul and Africa:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/viennalyons.html

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/scillitan.html

Eusebius gives a name for the predecessor of Irenaeus:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250105.htm

Pothinus having died with the other martyrs in Gaul at ninety years of age, Irenæus succeeded him in the episcopate of the church at Lyons.

The same is drawn from the account itself:

The blessed Pothinus, who had been entrusted with the bishopric of Lyons, was dragged to the judgment seat. He was more than ninety years of age, and very infirm, scarcely indeed able to breathe because of physical weakness; but he was strengthened by spiritual zeal through his earnest desire for martyrdom. Though his body was worn out by old age and disease, his life was preserved that Christ might triumph in it.

30. When he was brought by the soldiers to the tribunal, accompanied by the civil magistrates and a multitude who shouted against him in every manner as if he were Christ himself, he bore noble witness.

31. Being asked by the governor, Who was the God of the Christians, he replied, 'If you are worthy, you shall know.' Then he was dragged away harshly, and received blows of every kind. Those near him struck him with their hands and feet, regardless of his age; and those at a distance hurled at him whatever they could seize; all of them thinking that they would be guilty of great wickedness and impiety if any possible abuse were omitted. For thus they thought to avenge their own deities. Scarcely able to breathe, he was cast into prison and died after two days.

Bauer has some special comments concerning the addressees of Ignatius and of the Revelation:

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//publics/new/BAUER04.htm
Of the seven communities of Asia Minor mentioned in Revelation, Ignatius addresses only three -- Ephesus, Smyrna, and Philadelphia; [[79]] [[*83]] he does not address those of Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, and Laodicea. Can it be a coincidence that the churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia, to which Ignatius turns, are precisely those which fare best in the Apocalypse, appear also to be especially free of heresy,\4/ and later produce the martyrs of the catholic church during the persecution connected with Polycarp (<ts>Martyrdom of Polycarp</ts> 19.1-2)? Is it by chance that the communities of Pergamum, Thyatira,\5/ Sardis, and Laodicea\6/ are missing from Ignatius' audience -- communities that the seer vehemently rebukes, in which Balaamites and Nicolaitans (2.14 f.), the prophetess Jezebel and those who know "the deep things of Satan" (2.20, 24) live undisturbed and are allowed to mislead the servants of the Son of God (2.20), or which from the viewpoint of the author are utterly indifferent and lukewarm (3.15 ff.)? On his final journey, Ignatius passed through Laodicea and Sardis as well as Philadelphia and Smyrna, and yet neither of the former names is even mentioned by him, much less are the communities of the respective cities addressed in a letter. In Sardis, however, there were also a few who had not soiled their garments, according to Revelation 3.4. Similarly in Thyatira, which for the travelling Ignatius was no more difficult to reach nor more remote than Ephesus, Magnesia, and Tralles (which likewise had not seen him within their walls), already in the view of John (Rev. 2.24) the heretics are opposed by "the rest" (<gk>oi( loipoi</gk>) in such a way that the latter also is branded as a minority.

[And, likewise, of the addressees of 1 Peter...]

Does it not provide further food for thought, that we miss here a reference to the very same sector in southern and eastern Asia Minor to which the opening words of 1 Peter fail to refer -- a fact that, in the latter instance, has repeatedly caused astonishment and occasioned all sorts of attempts at explanation? Thus, for example, writes H. Windisch: "He [i.e. 1 Peter] apparently wanted to include all the provinces of Asia Minor. That he did not mention Lycia, Pamphylia, and Cilicia is indeed surprising; nevertheless, Lycia may still have been without any important congregations, Pamphylia may have been included in Galatia, and Cilicia may have been excluded as belonging to Syria."\11/ I find this just as unpersuasive as the notion that the unnamed Phrygia is hidden away in the designation "Asia." No doubt that was true for the Roman administration. But the Romans also united Pontus with Bithynia,\12/ which are as clearly separated as possible in 1 Peter, where the one district is mentioned at the [[82]] start of the series, while the other, separated by three names, concludes it. The Christians who, in the year 177/78, composed the account of martyrdoms [[*86]] that occurred in the churches of Vienna and Lyons still are able to distinguish accurately between Asia and Phrygia (EH 5.1.3, 5.3.4; cf. 5.14); and from the very beginning the Montanists\13/ are called Phrygians or Kataphrygians, which shows that even for a long time after 1 Peter, Phrygia has by no means been absorbed into Asia from the Christian perspective.\14/ I should therefore prefer to explain the blank spot on the map of Asia Minor in 1 Peter by believing that there simply was nothing to be gained for "ecclesiastically" oriented Christianity in that area at that time. In southeastern Asia Minor, from the borders of Syria westward to Phrygia, "ecclesiastical" intervention was not tolerated at the end of the first century, and even Rome realized the futility of such an attempt -- the same Rome which at about the same time acted in a quite different manner with respect to Corinth...

The book "Acts of the Apostles" has some geographical information (some that seems 'retroverted' into an earlier situation but which might have historical meaning all the same).

There is, of course, this famous verse, which you can interpret as you wish:

Acts 11:26
And for an entire year they met with the church and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.

This reference coheres with the statement of Suetonius about the expulsion of Jews under Claudius.

Acts 18:2-3
There he (Paul) met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them, and because he was a tentmaker as they were, he stayed and worked with them.

These words about Apollos, an Alexandrian who came to Ephesus, may refer to some kind of heresy or non-Christian sect.

Acts 18:24-26
Now a Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more adequately.

This passage is read by some interpreters as an indication that the author was post-Marcionite and wanted to distance Paul from Bithynia especially, where Marcion came from, and also from Asia, where Marcion and other heretics were active.

Acts 16:6-7
They passed through the Phrygian and Galatian region, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia; and after they came to Mysia, they were trying to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them;

These words, attributed to Paul and speaking to the Ephesians, confirm the above interpretation, in that they can only be a retroversion (and Ephesus is a chief city of Asia):

Acts 20:30
Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Bauer also detects the 'heresies' of Ephesus and Crete in the locations addressed by the pseudepigraphic pastoral epistles:

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//publics/new/BAUER04.htm
The pastoral Epistles (see below, chap. 9) are chronologically most recent, compared with Acts, Ignatius, and the Apocalypse. For the earliest history of Christianity in Ephesus they yield hardly anything that originated in actual recollection of the apostolic age. To the same extent that we are unwilling to concede that the epistle to Titus conveys actual knowledge about the relationship of Paul to Christianity in Crete (see above, 76), neither do we grant that 1-2 Timothy give us insight into the relations between the Apostle to the Gentiles and Ephesus. What they report to us concerning the apostolic period, namely that Paul himself already left one of his helpers there in order to check the danger of heresy which was already in full bloom (1 Tim. 1.3 ff.) is not correct, and is refuted by the future tense in Acts 20.30. This merely reveals to us the desire of orthodoxy to know that the Apostle to the Gentiles, whose activity in Ephesus is related by 1 Corinthians as well as Acts (which may also have provided the basis for the relationship between Paul and Crete), also stood on their side in the struggle against heresy.

While 2 Timothy 1.18 heaps praise on Onesiphorus for special services performed at Ephesus, it is at the same time admitted that his labors had not borne fruit. All the brethren in Asia, laments the same passage (1.15), have turned their backs on Paul. And Onesiphorus himself has vacated this futile battlefield in order to visit the Apostle in Rome (1.17). If we inquire into the history of heresy in Ephesus as to whence this difficulty may have arisen, we encounter, without supposing thereby to have found a complete explanation, the person of Cerinthus,\16/ whom we can introduce at this point with all the more justification since not only his gnostic teaching in general, but also his specific enmity toward Paul and his letters are clearly attested.\17/

it's quite surprising how many were Gnostics, even into the mid 2nd century, and the relative sparseness of Christian communities and Christian leaders

MrMacSon wrote: John-the-Evangelist -the-Apostle (Ephesus), and his followers

It's worth mentioning that the Gospel of John is sometimes located in Syria.

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//publics/new/BAUER04.htm
perhaps in Syria, where as I still hold to be extremely probable, the longer Johannine Epistle and the Gospel of John originated, around the time of Ignatius.

Papias of Hierapolis (c. 70-163 AD/CE d. Smyrna); a student of John

Also worth mentioning: Eusebius held that Papias never met 'John the Evangelist' (and apostle) but only that other John, 'John the elder'.

http://peterkirby.com/putting-papias-in-order.html

MrMacSon wrote:it's quite surprising how many were Gnostics, even into the mid 2nd century, and the relative sparseness of Christian communities and Christian leaders

Bauer remarks how, in third/fourth century Edessa, the Marcionites were called "Christians," while it were the so-called orthodox who had to be named after their first bishop.

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//publics/new/BAUER01.htm

Mar Aba, originally a fanatical pagan, during an attempt to cross the Tigris was brought to see the light through a miracle and an ensuing conversation with a Christian ascetic Joseph, whose surname was Moses. He was struck by the strangeness of Joseph's clothing (the Syriac uses the Greek loan-word <gk>schma</gk>), and wishing to know whether Joseph might be an orthodox, a Marcionite or a Jew, he asked (chap. 3): "Are you a Jew?" The answer was "Yes." Then comes a second question: "Are you a Christian?" To this comes also an affirmative response. Finally: "Do you worship the Messiah?" Again agreement is expressed. Then Mar Aba becomes enraged and says: "How can you be a Jew, a Christian, and a worshipper of the Messiah all at the same time?" Here the narrator inserts by way of explanation: "Following the local custom he used the word Christian to designate a Marcionite." Joseph himself then gives his irate companion the following explanation: "I am a Jew secretly [cf. Rom. 2.29]; I still pray to the living God . . . and abhor the worship of idols. I am a Christian truly, not as the Marcionites, who falsely call themselves Christians. For Christian is a Greek word, which in Syriac means Messiah-worshipper (<sy>mi$iAhiA</sy>).\51/ And if you ask me 'Do you worship the Messiah?', I worship him truly." [[*29]] [[24]]

This story reveals that even at a relatively late date, Marcionites designated themselves as the Christians -- much to the offence of the orthodox, who must be content with misleading alternatives such as "Messiah-worshippers." Is it not reasonable to suggest that something similar was true with respect to the beginnings of Christianity in Edessa?\52/ That would be an excellent explanation of why the orthodox call themselves Palûtians until far into the fourth century, or at least are known by that name to the public.\53/

Perhaps also we can draw in the comments from Origen about Celsus 'mistaking' gnostic doctrine for the genuine article.

MrMacSon wrote:it's quite surprising how many were Gnostics, even into the mid 2nd century, and the relative sparseness of Christian communities and Christian leaders

If you stipulate your timeframe as the "first half of the second century" (or the century spanning 68-167), this becomes completely obvious.

(And when you realize how difficult it is to reconstruct anything of the first century Christians, given that the legendary tendency is everywhere very apparent and that the 'documents' for the same period are thoroughly worked-over by grubby fingers, this does have some poignancy. Unsurprisingly, many people start from a basis of accepting the stories about the early-to-mid first century as authentic and veridical... forming judgments on that basis regarding the significance of the facts of the second century and late first century... so the point is lost on them.)

Peter Kirby wrote:

MrMacSon wrote: John-the-Evangelist -the-Apostle (Ephesus), and his followers

It's worth mentioning that the Gospel of John is sometimes located in Syria.

i have just been reading this, too

Peter Kirby wrote:

Papias of Hierapolis (c. 70-163 AD/CE d. Smyrna); a student of John

Also worth mentioning: Eusebius held that Papias never met 'John the Evangelist' (and apostle) but only that other John, 'John the elder'.
http://peterkirby.com/putting-papias-in-order.html

and also reading this, as well as about John of Patmos