A good argument to believe that the epistles were genuine

[Giuseppe]

Sorry, that doesn't follow.

Have you a better explanation for the question . "Do you know me?"
If yes, what is it?

[davidmartin]

The argument is not that the "none of the epistles have interpolation", but that the epistles for the most part precede both (1) Marcion and (2) the precursors of Marcion (i.e. Simonians and Cerdonites).

1 Yes
2 No the precursor of Marcion is probably whomever wrote the epistles can't prove other folk weren't earlier

[Giuseppe]

The argument is not that the "none of the epistles have interpolation", but that the epistles for the most part precede both (1) Marcion and (2) the precursors of Marcion (i.e. Simonians and Cerdonites).

1 Yes
2 No the precursor of Marcion is probably whomever wrote the epistles can't prove other folk weren't earlier

the best deniers of the authenticity of all the epistles (Van Manen et company) place them under the paternity of Simonians and Cerdonites.

[davidmartin]

Giuseppe you could have the epistles emerge from a 'gnostic milieu' for sure
what we see with Paul is he teaches only his own teachings he could have gone off in his own direction from almost any precursor and ended up completely disagreeing with them
we don't really know what was prior to the mythicists i don't know if we can say the Simonians where mythicists or who else was earlier if they were

[Peter Kirby]

The relevant passage can be found quoted in Greek in Eusebius, EH 4.14.7.

καὶ αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ Πολύκαρπος Μαρκίωνί ποτε εἰς ὄψιν αὐτῷ ἐλθόντι καὶ φήσαντι· ἐπιγίνωσκε ἡμᾶς, ἀπεκρίθη· ἐπιγινώσκω ἐπιγινώσκω τὸν πρωτότοκον τοῦ σατανᾶ.

in this passage:

To these things all the Asiatic churches testify, as do also those who, down to the present time, have succeeded Polycarp, who was a much more trustworthy and certain witness of the truth than Valentinus and Marcion and the rest of the heretics. He also was in Rome in the time of Anicetus and caused many to turn away from the above-mentioned heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received from the apostles this one and only system of truth which has been transmitted by the Church.

6. And there are those that heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe in Ephesus and seeing Cerinthus within, ran out of the bath-house without bathing, crying, 'Let us flee, lest even the bath fall, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.'

7. And Polycarp himself, when Marcion once met him and said, 'Do you know us?' replied, 'I know the first born of Satan.' Such caution did the apostles and their disciples exercise that they might not even converse with any of those who perverted the truth; as Paul also said, 'A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing he that is such is subverted, and sins, being condemned of himself.'

The Latin translation of Irenaeus, AH, which is the extant manuscript, agrees, saying:

et dicenti, Cognoscis nos? respondit: Cognosco te primogenitum Satan.

The question then is "Do you know us?"

Which allows us to correct the translation in the ANF, which renders the plural as singular (and adds words to the reply that aren't there):

But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time — a man who was of much greater weight, and a more steadfast witness of truth, than Valentinus, and Marcion, and the rest of the heretics. He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles — that, namely, which is handed down by the Church. There are also those who heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within. And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, 'Do you know us?' 'I know the first born of Satan.' Such was the horror which the apostles and their disciples had against holding even verbal communication with any corrupters of the truth; as Paul also says, A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sins, being condemned of himself. Titus 3:10 There is also a very powerful Epistle of Polycarp written to the Philippians, from which those who choose to do so, and are anxious about their salvation, can learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of the truth. Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.

Another point of fact here. This particular passage of Irenaeus says that Polycarp was "coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God." It relates an anecdote about John and Cerinthus in Ephesus.

It then also says that Polycarp of Smyrna "met him [Marcion] on one occasion," without the text placing this meeting specifically in Rome or in Ephesus (or for that matter in Smyrna or in a city of Pontus, or any particular city). It is possible to assume that this allegedly took place in Rome, and it's possible to assume that it allegedly took place in Ephesus, or to assume that it's imagined as somewhere else in Asia Minor, but none of those things are said.

I asked:

It is said that Marcion introduced the Apostolikon in Rome to recommend himself in that community.

What is the reference here?

And it's been useful to get this reference because it doesn't say this.

The text here doesn't refer to the introduction of an Apostolikon, and it doesn't refer to Rome.

It can be alleged that this is what was in some way meant, beyond the sense of the words themselves but present to the author's mind, but this is not what is said. The claim is false.

Sorry, that doesn't follow.

Have you a better explanation for the question . "Do you know me?"
If yes, what is it?

It reads as a rejection of Marcion and his followers, not being recognized, except as "the first born of Satan."

Justin for example allows that Marcion and his disciples style themselves Christians, but he's uncomfortable recognizing them as true fellows in the Christian faith.

The story shows how Polycarp rejected them, with a witty apothegm directed at their founder and everyone following their founder Marcion.

It's possible to interpret the story as historical or partly so. It's possible to hypothesize the setting of a supposedly historical basis of the story as involving the presentation of a text by the Marcionites, i.e. the Apostolikon, followed by the question, 'Do you recognize us?' It's possible to further postulate that this took place in Rome. These conjectures are possible, even plausible. I don't write here to discourage the role of conjecture, but the nature of it should be recognized.

[Giuseppe]

It can be alleged that this is what was in some way meant, beyond the sense of the words themselves but present to the author's mind, but this is not what is said. The claim is false.

so where can I find the reference to the money given by Marcion to persuade the Roman community?

Isn't the money an universal language, without need of being recommended because money recommends itself?

Could the Apostolikon be compared to the money insofar the authority of the origin of the Apostolikon was recognized also by the Roman community?

[Peter Kirby]

It can be alleged that this is what was in some way meant, beyond the sense of the words themselves but present to the author's mind, but this is not what is said. The claim is false.

so where can I find the reference to the money given by Marcion to persuade the Roman community?

Isn't the money an universal language, without need of being recommended because money recommends itself?

Could the Apostolikon be compared to the money insofar the authority of the origin of the Apostolikon was recognized also by the Roman community?

These are all fair questions. I suggest we find that reference and try to see what it implies (and what is extraneous to the text).

[GakuseiDon]

I found one reference, which was in fact in Tertullian's "The prescription against heretics":
https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ ... ian11.html

Where was Marcion then, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus then, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago,--in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,--and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled.

Marcion, indeed, [went] with the two hundred sesterces which which he had brought into the church, and, when banished at last to a permanent excommunication, they scattered abroad the poisons of their doctrines. Afterwards, it is true, Marcion professed repentance, and agreed to the conditions granted to him--that he should receive reconciliation if he restored to the church all the others whom he had been training for perdition: he was prevented, however, by death.

Harnack hints at another reference in Hippolytus of Rome but I couldn't find it.

Interesting that Tertullian calls Marcion a "zealous student of Stoicism". It might be Tertullian's attempt to smear Marcion, since there are possible similarities between Marcion's idea of "good" and the Stoics idea of "virtue", but not much more. But for me it is consistent with the idea of a Jewish Christianity gradually fracturing under the influence of a strong pagan culture.