a fragment of Papias

[Peter Kirby]

Taking a cue from John Chapman's excellent article:

http://books.google.com/books?id=XG0MAA ... di&f=false

I have a post about taking Irenaeus seriously:

http://peterkirby.com/taking-irenaeus-seriously.html

Where we can find Irenaeus in agreement with Victorinus (and Athanasius) in such a way as to make it clear that Irenaeus drew his statement about the Lord passing through five different periods of life (infancy, childhood, adolescence, young manhood, and mature manhood) from Papias.

The article explains Irenaeus but also adds a fragment to Papias. The fragment is one that adds to the considerations weighing in favor of the opinion that Papias knew GJohn and that Papias favored GJohn chronologically, something several have argued independently.

[stephan happy huller]

Very interesting. Here is the original material from Victorinus:

Nunc igitur de inerrabili gloria Dei in providentia videas memorari; tamen, ut mens parva poterit, conabor ostendere. Ut Adam illum per septimanam reformaverit, atque universae suae creaturae subveniret, nativitate filii sui Iesu Christi Domini nostri factum est. (0313A) Quis itaque lege Dei doctus, quis plenus Spiritu sancto, non respiciat corde, ea die Gabriel angelum Mariae virgini evangelizasse, qua die draco Evam seduxit; ea die Spiritum sanctum Mariam virginem inundasse, qua lucem fecit; ea die in carne esse conversum, qua terram et aquam fecit; ea die in lacte esse conversum, qua stellas fecit; ea die in sanguine, qua terra et aqua foetus suos ediderunt; ea die in carne esse conversum, qua die hominem de humo instruxit; ea die natum esse Christum, qua hominem finxit; eadem die esse passum, quo Adam cecidit; ea die resurrexit a mortuis, qua lucem fecit. Humanitatem quoque suam septenario numero consummat, nativitatis, infantiae, pueritiae, adolescentiae, iuventutis, perfectae aetatis, occasum. (0313B) Iudaeis quoque humanitatem suam etiam his modis ostendi, cum esurit, sitit, cibum potumque dedit, cum ambulat, eas esse scit, cum super cervicalem dormivit (Marc., IV, 38) ; cum autem freta aut procella pedibus ingreditur, ventis imperat, aegros curat, et claudos reformat, caecos eloquentia instituit videte Dominum se esse nuntiari eiusdem.

Duodenario numero dicere ut supra memoravi, per duodenas horas bifarie divisus est lucis et noctis, per has namque horas, menses et anni et tempora et saecula computantur. Constituta sunt itaque sine dubio autem diei angeli duodecim, noctis angeli duodecim, pro numero scilicet horarum. (0314A) Hi sunt namque XXIIII testes dierum et noctium (Apoc., IV, 4) , qui sedent ante thronum Dei, coronas aureas in capitibus suis habentes, quos in Apocalypsis Ioannis apostoli et evangelistae seniores vocat, idcirco quia seniores sunt et aliis angelis et hominibus. (0316B)

http://mlat.uzh.ch/MLS/text.php?tabelle ... apparatus=

I have thoughts of my own on this from a Hebrew perspective. The number 7 x 7 is very significant especially since Eusebius's pagan adversary identifies Jesus as being crucified forty nine years before the destruction of the temple (i.e. 21 CE) which is linked with the cycle of sabbatical years by Jews and early Christians by means of Daniel. In other words, my suspicion is that ministry of Jesus in a forty ninth year has been replaced by the stupid white people deliberate misunderstanding 'Jesus was almost fifty.' Why? It should be obvious - the destruction of the temple = Daniel's 7 x 70 is original. It was replaced by Irenaeus. I am not sure how this new material from Victorinus compares with Irenaeus. My sense has always been that pre-Irenaean traditions survive in later writers, it's just a matter of finding them (usually I say look to the texts identified as 'pseudo-so and so.' But again my 'gut' things something original has been replaced by something derivative in Irenaeus where 'original' = 'tradition of Mark the evangelist.'

[andrewcriddle]

One possibility is that Papias on the basis of Jewish tradition, (e.g. the age at which levites entered full temple service), regarded full maturity as starting at agw thirty. Irenaeus ftom a hellenistic background regarded the age of full maturity as rather later and so misinterpreted Papias.

Andrew Criddle

[Peter Kirby]

One possibility is that Papias on the basis of Jewish tradition, (e.g. the age at which levites entered full temple service), regarded full maturity as starting at agw thirty. Irenaeus ftom a hellenistic background regarded the age of full maturity as rather later and so misinterpreted Papias.

Andrew Criddle

It's possible. Victorinus doesn't support Irenaeus in elaborating the stages of life into the years we find in Irenaeus. This would also pull the rug out from under the argument that Papias interpreted GJohn similarly to Irenaeus.

[stephan happy huller]

of (1) birth, (2) infancy, (3) childhood, (4) adolescence, (5) youth , (6) mature age, (7) His setting

= 49

Interesting. But it is seven stages of life, no?

Irenaeus drew his statement about the Lord passing through five different periods of life (infancy, childhood, adolescence, young manhood, and mature manhood) from Papias

[stephan happy huller]

I only see Irenaeus reflected in this fragment. I don't get it.

[Peter Kirby]

The quotes from non-Christian writers show the common understanding about seven stages of life. Victorinus and Irenaeus portray Jesus passing through five of them, up through mature manhood, thus obtaining the full development of the body and mind of a man. They omit the last two. Irenaeus does conclude with his death, while Victorinus adds death to the end and nativity to the start, parallel parts that are extraneous to the understanding of the stages of life but which round it out again to seven.

I'd suggest John Chapman's article. Irenaeus explicitly attributes this tradition, which Victorinus also knows independently, to the elders who saw John.

[arnoldo]

Yet for love’s sake I prefer to appeal to you just for what I am—I, Paul, an ambassador [of Christ Jesus] and an old man and now a prisoner for His sake also. .

Philemon 1:9

Paul was perhaps aware of these seven stages of life with his reference of being an "old man." According to Jerome Murphy-O'Conner, Paul was approximately 60 years old when he wrote his letter to Philemon and the concept of the seven stages of life is how he begin his book, Paul: A Critical Life.