Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Ulan wrote:I haven't reread Parvus' texts now [recently?], but what I remember of the thesis, I think you [i.e., S.A.] are a bit disingenuous here. Isn't the theory exactly that the texts are nothing but [I.e., not] original? The whole setup, with some captive dragged all the way through Asia Minor from Antioch to Rome while using it at the same time as some kind of triumphal march with audiences to all the churches of the area screams "fake". Also, the texts have two very distinctive layers of incompatible theological ideas. Why does this qualify as "resting on the middle Greek rescension being original"?

You may lament that the Syriac texts are not considered, but "treating the text as original" is not what this is about. Of course, I may have more vivid memories of the original Marcionite thesis here than the one about Apelles, or mix the two up.

Actually, Roger says that the middle (shorter Greek) recension of the letters were original letters of Perigrinus, while an Apellian deacon arrested near Troas in Asia Minor and being taken to Antioch in Syria for punishment for creating disturbances there, that had been reworked by a proto-orthodox editor/interpolator to make them letters of a legendary folk/martyr Ignatius on his way from Antioch in Syria to Rome to witness to the emperor the strength of the proto-orthodox faith. The direction of travel is reversed, and the interpolations to rehabilitate his Apellian teaching are done "clumsily". The original Peregrinus was an attention seeking weirdo, really, eventually attaining his goal of total self destruction.

As many know, I myself have suggested a somewhat similar process in which original letters of a non-Christian Paul, which taught a doctrine of shared inheritance of the future blessed age between Judeans and god-fearing gentiles, were "adopted and adapted" by one or more "Christians" who held that Jesus Christ was a divine savior figure akin to a mystery cult.

I suppose that I have a good many objections to overcome myself. However, I can see why early adherents of such a "Christ cult" might have come into contact with remnants of Paul's faithful gentiles after the Judean war (66-74 CE) and sought to bring them into the fold, now that the prospect of a realized blessed age seemed rather bleak. Faith in the salvation effected by the Christ mystery was an easy substitute for hope in a blessed messianic age.

I need to know more about "Apellian" teaching ...

DCH

DCHindley wrote:I need to know more about "Apellian" teaching ...

I collected a lot of ancient quotations about his views here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2130#p47543.

I know I ask too much from the forum but could at least try to boil arguments down to their weakest points. Do we all agree that Parvus's theory dies a quick death if the Syriac recension (which he apparently didn't even know about) is earlier than the middle Greek recension? Is it possible to just admit that arguments have 'Achilles heels'? I remember Pete the mountainman wouldn't admit that the Dura Europa Diatessaron fragment disproved his theory. I just hope that the rest of us have more integrity and honesty. Again, if the Syriac recension is more original than the 'middle Greek' then Parvis theory =

And to follow up on DCH's point. Can we all agree that the situation with the Ignatian corpus (i.e. either being an expansion from the Syriac recension or a reduction from the middle Greek) is relevant to the discussion of Marcion's relationship with the Pauline corpus. I know these are bold, ballsy assertions but it sure beats the usual drivel in these discussions. I think its a good thing to boil things down to stark comparisons and contrasts. Again, whether or not its an expansion or a reduction 'what happened' to the Ignatian corpus has a relationship to the Pauline letters in the age.

Secret Alias wrote: Do we all agree that Parvus's theory dies a quick death if the Syriac recension ... is earlier than the middle Greek recension?

Yes, I agree.

RParvus wrote: As Ulan noted, my Ignatian theory can be read for free on Vridar. There I attempted to present the argument more clearly. I first argued that Ignatius was Peregrinus, and then went on to present the case that his brand of Christianity was Apellean. The Vridar series also includes some additional material at a few points and a couple of things I had changed my mind about in the meantime.

The Vridar series index is @ Roger Parvus: Letters Supposedly Written by Ignatius

DCHindley wrote:Actually, Roger says that the middle (shorter Greek) recension of the letters were original letters of Perigrinus, while an Apellian deacon arrested near Troas in Asia Minor and being taken to Antioch in Syria for punishment for creating disturbances there, that had been reworked by a proto-orthodox editor/interpolator to make them letters of a legendary folk/martyr Ignatius on his way from Antioch in Syria to Rome to witness to the emperor the strength of the proto-orthodox faith. The direction of travel is reversed, and the interpolations to rehabilitate his Apellian teaching are done "clumsily". The original Peregrinus was an attention seeking weirdo, really, eventually attaining his goal of total self destruction.

Yes, thanks for the summary, David. That's roughly what I remember about the theses (the Apellean and former Marcionite one), except the Troas detail, which I forgot (I think I deemed that not important). My main point in the quote was about the use of the term "original" here. I'm not sure whether you can consider anything an "original" version if the whole story setup was changed around and the bulk of the theology in there has been edited. You can at best try and reconstruct what you think may be original from this. What is this then, 90% original? 50%? 30%? Or did someone just take snippets from some earlier work and bolstered his own story with those?

However, I have no idea how the Syriac version fits into this. But then again, I never claimed I did.

DCHindley wrote:As many know, I myself have suggested a somewhat similar process in which original letters of a non-Christian Paul, which taught a doctrine of shared inheritance of the future blessed age between Judeans and god-fearing gentiles, were "adopted and adapted" by one or more "Christians" who held that Jesus Christ was a divine savior figure akin to a mystery cult.

I suppose that I have a good many objections to overcome myself. However, I can see why early adherents of such a "Christ cult" might have come into contact with remnants of Paul's faithful gentiles after the Judean war (66-74 CE) and sought to bring them into the fold, now that the prospect of a realized blessed age seemed rather bleak. Faith in the salvation effected by the Christ mystery was an easy substitute for hope in a blessed messianic age.

Yup, I guess at that time, Judaism had no other choice than to try and reinvent itself. One way or the other, or all at once. I guess our main problem regarding decisions here is not that many of the proposals are unlikely, but that there are too many proposals that are likely.

(Edit: I should not write before I had my morning coffee. My English tends to be even worse than usual then )

Yes, I agree.

Well thank you for your honesty and clarity. Best of luck attracting others to your theory.

DCHindley wrote:
While I am aware that you think his brand of Christianity was Apellian Christianity, it seems that he would have had some background in Cynic philosophy if he could in short order after being cast out of the Apellian assemblies become able to support himself as a Cynic teacher. I am not seeing much in the way of Cynic philosophy in what is stated in the letters, but that is partly what chapter 4 is all about, so allow me a day or so to read that far. I am not especially well versed on Greek philosophy.

DCH

David,

If “Ignatius” was indeed Peregrinus, I would not expect to find much Cynic philosophy in the Ignatian letters. Lucian seems to locate Peregrinus’ initiation into Cynicism after his exit from Christianity. Right after saying that Peregrinus was kicked out by the Christians Lucian writes this:

“Thereafter he went away a third time, to Egypt, to visit Agathobulus,17 where he took that wonderful course of training in asceticism, shaving one half of his head, daubing his face with mud, and demonstrating what they call 'indifference' by erecting his yard amid a thronging mob of bystanders,18 besides giving and, taking blows on the back-sides with a stalk of fennel, and playing the mountebank even more audaciously in many other ways.” (A.M. Harmon’s translation of “The Death of Peregrinus,” my bolding)

Why isn't there a stronger argument to add with respect to Polycarp being Ignatius/Peregrinus? Note the bird that is seen coming out of the fire in Eusebius' version of the Martyrdom of Polycarp. This is the strongest link of them all IMHO