Contrary to popular belief, “Philadelphia” does not exactly mean “city of brotherly love”.  It was founded by Eumenes, king of Pergamum , after his brother Attalus, whose fidelity to his brother had given him the title of “Philadelphos” --  the lover of his brother.   Philadelphia overlooks a fertile plain, and was usually prosperous, but was vulnerable to earthquakes.  After the great earthquake of 17 AD, imperial funds were forthcoming to help with the repairs.  Philadelphia renamed itself “New Caesarea” in honor of the emperor Tiberius. 

Philadelphia continued to fear earthquake, and the letter to Philadelphia reflects its longing for stability and security.  The “one who overcomes” will become a pillar in the temple, and live there forever.  This image conflicts with the later statement that the New Jerusalem would have no temple, since it would be occupied by God.

Philadelphia is offered an “open door” to a world controlled by God.  The following letter – to Laodicea -- uses the opposite image, with Jesus standing outside a closed door.

The writer again warns against the “synagogue of Satan” of those “who pretend to be Jews but are not”.  This may reflect some internal division among the Jews, such as between those who supported the temple in Jerusalem and those who preferred the temple at Heliopolis.  Alternatively, the ones who “pretend to be Jews but are not” may be the Gentile Christians who were persuaded into full Jewish practices by the Judaisers of Acts 15:1.  A similar argument is put forward by Pharisaic believers in Jerusalem in Acts 15:5  New Christians who become circumcised are denounced by Paul in Galatians 5, who says that “if you are circumcised then Christ is of no use to you at all”

 

 

 

Sardis was a frontier city on the edge of the Persian Empire, at the end of the Royal Road from Persepolis.   It was a prosperous city – gold was said to come down the river as “golden sand”.  In peaceful times, its position gave it all the benefits of a “railhead” collecting goods for transshipment to Persia, and breaking down incoming shipments for distribution.

 

Its most famous king was King Croesus, who gave his name to the phrase “as rich  as Croesus”.  On learning that a Persian army was on its way to attack, he took advice from the oracle at Delphi, which told him that if he went to war, he would “destroy a great kingdom”.  However, it turned out that the kingdom he would destroy was his own.  Pictures of him pouring oil onto his own funeral pyre became iconic images, some on Greek vases which still survive.

 

By New Testament times, Sardis was again a flourishing commercial city.  John remarks that the Christians there “have a  name of being alive, but you are dead”.  They are commanded to “wake up” in view of the imminence of the Second Coming, which will come unexpectedly “like a thief in the night”.

 

As at some of the other Asian churches, John was worried about the Christians’ contamination with pagan practices, but “there are still a few persons in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes.”  The “conquerors” are promised white clothes, and that their names will not be removed from the book of life.

Thyatira was a flourishing commercial center, noted for its dyeing, metalwork, and woolen industry.

St. Paul met “Lydia”, from Thyatira, in Philippi.  Some commentators have found it odd that somebody who came from Thyatira, Lydia, should be called “Lydia” and suggest that Luke got his names confused.  Paul may have visited Thyatira on his third missionary journey, though this is conjecture.  Lydia is described as a “dealer in purple cloth” (Thyatira Purple is mentioned in the Iliad).  Her hospitality to Paul and Silas reflects her independence and financial status.

Thyatira appeared to have encountered libertine tendancies, perhaps centered on a leader called “Jezebel”, though possibly the name is merely polemical.  Her followers were accused of sexual misconduct and eating food offered to idols.  The first may reflect the need of business people to follow the customs of trade guilds, particularly at their celebrations; faced with the problem of participating in pagan dinners, Paul himself has a more casual approach “eat what is set before you and ask no questions” (I Cor:8), a position that would not appeal to John, with his apocalyptic polarized views.

We discussed the timing of early “heresies”.  Tom pointed out that in early churches,  common practice was more important that common belief.  We noted that Prof Ehrmann attributes the eventual dominance of the “catholic” version of Christianity to its emphasis on having a  Creed, Canon, and Clergy.

 

 

 

 

Pergamum was a great city, at one time capital of Roman Asia, until the title was taken by Ephesus.  Its shrine to Ascepelius was  famous for its healing, and the library second only to the one at Alexandria.  The Temple to Zeus was excavated at the end of the nineteenth century, and exported to Berlin, where the Pergamum Museum is named after it.

The rather cryptic letter to Pergamum contained in Revelation refers to “the seat of Satan”.  This may refer to the Temple of Zeus, or to the Roman Praesidium.

 

The Pergamum church was influenced by the mysterious Nicolaitans, whom we saw in the letter to Ephesus, and by those who had been taught by “Balaam”.  Balaam is a semi-legendary figure, whose name was given to all kinds of heresy and error.  The quasi-historical reference to Balaam in Numbers 22-24 is, however, somewhat sympathetic.  Here he appears as a freelance prophet, who, when hired to curse the Israelites, finds he can only pronounce words of blessing.

 

 

 

 

REVELATION  2:8-15

Smyrna (modern Izmir) was destroyed in about 500 BC and rebuilt, on a lower site in 70 BC.  The old acropolis overlooked the new city, and was called the “crown of Smyrna”.

In New Testament times, Smyrna was a major and prosperous city.  The Christian church was well established, but subject to conflict with the Jewish community and the Graeco-Roman authorities.  The church father Polycarp was martyred there.

John commends their faith, but forecasts persecution, though this will not last for a long time.

Many commentators* seem to read the reference to “the synagogue of Satan” in a way directly opposite to its surface meaning.  John refers to “those who pretend to be Jews and are not”.  It is perhaps unreasonable to jump to the conclusion that John is in fact talking about Jews.  Perhaps he is writing from the point of view of a conservative Jewish Christian, who is unconvinced that Gentiles can be Christians since they are not Jews.  Certainly “the nations” are invariably portrayed as evil in the rest of the Book.  On this reading, the “pretenders” would be Gentiles who adopted Jewish practices on becoming Christians, a practice that Paul opposed, in the face of opposition from “people sent by James”.  The “synagogue of Satan” would actually be part of the Gentile Christian community………

 

·          For example:  http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=815&cuItem_itemID=28248  

REVELATION 1 and 2:1-7

The last book of the New Testament and of the Bible is the Book of Revelation.  The word “revelation “ is a translation of the Greek word Apocalypse.  Apocalyptic literature forms a class of writings that were popular in the First Century.  Revelation is the only wholly apocalyptic book in the Bible, though Daniel, Ezekiel, and even the gospels contain apocalyptic elements.  The apocryphal books 2 Esdras and the Shepherd oF Hermas are apocalyptic.  

Apocryphal books are presented as an explanation of the Last Things” to the writer.  They are highly symbolic, but this may not mean that they attempted to conceal secrets, but they used a commonly accepted “vocabulary” that is, however, difficult for the modern reader.

We looked as some cartoons, drawn and published for political purposes.  We had no difficulty with cartoons drawn in the 1940’s, but those a hundred years earlier were opaque.

Apocryphal books are often pseudepigraphical – examples are the apocalypses of Moses, Abraham, and Enoch .  Traditionally Revelation is ascribed to John the Evangelist, who is also identified as the writer of the Gospel of John and the Letters of John.  However, it was pointed out early on that the Greek of the Gospel and the Letters is impeccable, whereas the Greek of Revelation is very strange. 

Ireneaus dated Revelation to the later years of the emperor Domitian, but the book may well be earlier.  We worked through the prophecy of the temple contained in chapter 11, which seems to indicate that the book was written while the Jerusalem temple was under siege, though the author predicts that the  siege will be lifted “after 42 months” and after “the Gentiles’ had penetrated only to the outer courts.  Since in fact the Roman legions conquered the center of the temple in 70 AD, this suggests that the book is earlier than that.

An interesting puzzle is the prophecy of the “eight kings” in chapter  17:9-11.  Comparing this to a list of actual Roman emperors suggest that the book was written during the Year of the Four Emperors, when the author expects “one of the seven” to return “although dead”, which suggests a reference to the abortive rebellion under “Nero Revividus”.

Revelation contains short letters to the churches of the Roman province of Asia.  We looked briefly at the first – to the city of Ephesus.  Three members of our group have been to Ephesus, and told us of its great buildings including one of the Wonders of World – the Artemisium, or “Temple of Diana of the Ephesians”

Paul spent over two years at Ephesus, and it was a center of Christian development for several hundred years.  “John” however, upbraids the Ephesians for having lost “the love you had at first.”   However, the Ephesian Christians are congratulated on resisting heretics, and even those who “claim to be apostles and are not.”

Some have suggested that the prophecy about the “tree of life” is a subtle reference to the sacred date-tree of Aphrodite in Ephesus.

The Epistle of Jude claims to be written by "Jude the Brother of James". Many take this is a reference to the apostle Jude, brother of James, and thus of Jesus. Others assume that the letter is pseudepigraphic, others point out that there may have been more than one pair of brothers with those names. The author does not explicitly claim to be an apostle; indeed the apostles seem to be referred to as figures of the past.

We looked at an interesting fragment in which Eusebius quotes from Hegesippus about the persecution of Christians by the Empereor Domitian. Two grandsons of Jude are caught up in the dragnet, but under interrogation prove to be ignorant peasants who pose little threat to Rome. So umimpressed is the emperor that the progrom is called off, and prisoners released. This seems to suppport the theory of the apostles as "unlettered laymen", as described by the High Priest in Acts.

Jude seems to contain much "boilerplate" material common to the Second Letter of Peter, attacking rival church members but giving tantalisingly little concrete information about them. The writer quotes from the Assumption of Moses, a contemporary document, and it is frustrating that no copies of this document have survived. He also quoted from the Book of Enoch, treating both these works as authoritative, though today the Book of Enoch is only recognised by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.

The letter concludes with a stunning doxology, which almost amounts to a definitive definition of Christianity.

II and III John form part of the collection known as the "Catholic Epistles" though each has a named addressee.

II John is addressed to "The elect lady", which may be a nickname for a particular church, or may refer to a particular person. Indeed, it had been argued the "Eklekta Kuria" may actually be the name of a person.

The context appears to be one in which congregations met in members' homes and were visited by missionaries from outside the city. John warns against untrustworthy visitors, and says that they should not be given (official?) hospitality.

III John is even shorter, and is mainly taken up with a quarrel between the writer and "Diotrophes", who has been blocking correspondence and refusing hospitality visitors, including the writer's friend, Demetrius.

III John is not mentioned in early church literature, and Knox considers that it may have been considered of no great importance until a canon of scripture was being defined, and III John was produced from some church's archives.

The Catholic Epistles are those which appear to be addressed to no particular church, but were written as general guides for Christian behavior.  I John is the fourth of the Catholic Epistles.

As far back as the early church fathers, there has been discussion of the probable authorship of the three Epistles of John.  Stylistically they are similar to each other, and to the Gospel of John, but not to the Book of Revelation, which is written in a very primitive Greek.    Suggestions as to the author include the apostle – brother of James and one of the sons of Zebedee  -- and the elusive John the Elder who may have lived in Ephesus up to around 140 AD.

We looked at the extraordinary story of  the Comma Johanneum, contained in the King James version of I John 5: 7-8.  This passage, which would be the only one in scripture explicitly describing the Trinity, is found in no ancient Greek text, but found its way into the Latin Vulgate some time in the tenth century.  When Erasmus omitted it from his pioneering  publication of the Greek text, he met with many protests that he was tampering with scripture.  The story goes that he offered to replace the section if one Greek document could be produced that included the quoted passage.  Apparently one was then produced (invented?) to order.  All modern translations omit the section, as does the latest version of the Vulgate itself.

Much of I John seems occupied with current heresies – some that denied that Jesus has come in the flesh (Docetism?  Adoptionism) and the libertine heresies such as Antinomianism.  However, I John is memorable for its beautiful poetry – I John 4:16 (and for that matter I John 3:16) has a lasting impact.

Commentators differ as to whether the apostle Peter authored II Peter, and to whether I Peter and II Peter have the same author. However, II Peter explicitly states that Peter was the author, and the different styles of the amensuenses (Sylvanus, the case of II Peter), may account for the other differences. II Peter is mainly concerned with the problem of Christians who deliberately sin, which may be an early form of Antinomianism. Peter sees the end of the world as coming with fire, which may have inspired some Gnostic works.

Hebrew did fall out of spoken use by the time the Jews were exiled into Babylon. However existing prayers and of course the Torah-Prophets-Writings itself was studied in the original Hebrew. And with the exception of Babylonian writings, Jewish scholars almost always wrote their works in Hebrew.

More recently (200 years ago) some prayers were translated and scholarly writings written in German, to appeal to those who were more assimilated into German society. Also at some point Yiddish (a combination of Hebrew and German) became a language of use among Jews in Europe. And at that time a major effort was made to revive Hebrew as an actual spoken language, with a couple of newspapers and study groups popping up in parts of Europe.

In the meantime, Middle Eastern Jews were speaking Arabic. My guess is there were a handful Middle Eastern Jews in Israel (or whatever it was called then) when the Turks were in power, so they were speaking Arabic (and praying and studying in Hebrew). When the European Jews returned to Israel - which started in the 1800's - they brought in the languages of their home countries (Russian & Polish much more than German), Yiddish, and a revived spoken Hebrew.

I don't think Latin was used by Jews very much at any given time - the Septuagint was a translation at the request (or command) of the authorities at that time.

We reviewed in detail the information about Peter that is contained in the New Testament. we also discussed the different views held by commentators as the the pseudepigraphic nature of I Peter and II Peter, and the discussion as to whether they were written by the same person. We completed our reading of I Peter, and ran through the quiz questions. We read a few verses from II Peter before adjourning until next week.

Our information about James is very sparse in the Gospels, but is augmented in Acts, the Pauline Epistles, and even in Josephus (if he is "James the Just")

In contrast, there are several stories about Peter in the Gospels, and in Acts, but they cease abruptly after his escape from a Herodian prison. He appears one more time after that.

Traditionally, I Peter has always been considered to have been written by the Peter of the gospels, but recently critics have queried the fact that the Greek is good, whereas all the disciples are described as "unlettered laymen" in Acts. The frequent references to persecution and to the "dispersion" are difficult to date if we accept Eusebius' account that Peter died at about the same time as Paul -- around 65 CE.

Peter does, however, acknowledge that Silvanus helped with the writing. Perhaps, if Silvanus produced a literate draft, Peter would be disinclined to tamper with it in detail.

We looked at the dates of the Domitian and Neronian persecutions, both of which are later that the presumed date of Peter's death. One usually overlooked possibility is the attack on Christians by Agrippa. This may well have led to a mass exodus from Judaea by Christians, and would allow for an early dating of I Peter, which might then even be the earliest Christian document.

The New Testament mentions four people named James ("Jacob" in the Greek):

1. James the son of Zebedee ("James the Great")

An early disciple of Jesus (Matthew 4:21), he was present at the Transfiguration and the Raising of Jairus' daughter. He and his brother were given the nickname "Boanerges", which translates as "Sons of Thunder". The meaning of this is obscure, but may denote a tendancy to violent action. . Jesus predicted the death of James (Mark 10:39), and this occured within a few years when the grandson of Herod the Great, Agrippa I, took control of the whole of Israel. Agrippa may have seen the Christians as a threat to his power; he had James executed, and then planned to execute Peter. If this James was the writer of the epistle, it must have been written before 42 CE, and thus be unrelated to Paul's letters on "Justification by Faith", such as Romans, which were written some ten years later.

 

2. James the Brother of Jesus ("James the Just"). James the Brother of Jesus was initially opposed to Jesus' ministry (Mark 3:31 ), but was converted and became head of the church in Jerusalem. Paul cites him as one of the first to receive a resurrection appearance ( I Corinthians 15:7). He is identified with the "James the brother of Christ" mentioned by Josephus as having been executed by the high priest, Ananus, during the interregnum after the unexpected death of the Roman governor, Festus in 61 CE. This move was apparently highly unpopular, and led to the deposition of Ananus. Eusebius quotes Hegessipus at length, recounting events from the trial of James (including the cryptic question "What is the Gate of Jesus?") and an account of James being thrown down the steps of the temple and then bludgeoned to death. "James the Just" had a reputation for extreme piety, his knees calloused by much prayer in the temple. At the arraignment of Paul before the Jerusalem church, on a charge of having taught Jews to reject the Law, it is James who decides the action to be taken.

3. James the Son of Alphaeus. Little is known about this James, He is usually identified with "James the Less" (Mark 15:40)

4. James of Judas. A translation problem inhibits our understanding as to whether this James was a brother or a father of Judas Iscariot.

 

A puzzle for any of these possible authors is the high standard of the Greek, not to be expected from a group of men whom the priests considered to functionally illiterate (Acts 4:13 ), though Katrhryn suggested that the letter was written in Aramaic and then translated by another.

To many commentators it seems odd that James, if he were the brother of Jesus, should never appeal to his brother for authority, or as an example. For that matter he does not quote any incident from the Jesus' ministry, though he may have been opposed to it at the time. Some Christian preachers have tried to show the Christian influence on James' writing, but others have shown that all references are Talmudic, and claim that the Epistle may be a Jewish document with two small Christian modifications. The ease with which the letter may be read in Jewish or Christian terms may show how close early Christian thinking was to Jewish thought.

The writer seems to assume a violent congregation, with adultery and murder common occurences.

 

 

 

 

 

Ehrmann asks, given the large number of versions of early Christianity, why did the one we know today become dominant?  He suggests three crucial factors -- the three C's.

 

This unified front involved (a) developing a rigor­ous administrative hierarchy that protected and conveyed the truth of the religion (eventuating, for example, in the papacy), (b) insisting that all true Christians profess a set body of doctrines pro­moted by these leaders (the Christian creeds), and (c) appealing to a set of authoritative books of Scripture as bearers of these inspired doctrinal truths (the "New" Testament; see Chapter 1). Or to put the matter in its simplest and most allitera­tive terms, the proto-orthodox won these conflicts by insisting on the validity of the clergy, the creed, and the canon.

 

We had another look at Hebrews 10-13.  Chapter 10 continued the complicated metaphor of Christ as priest, and again ascribed passages in the Old Testament as sayings of Jesus, reinforcing the suspicion that a collection of sayings was being used, rather than scripture itself.  Chapter 11 is known among English evangelicals as the “Westminster Abbey of the Bible”, with its great collection of vignettes of OT characters, rather like the Irish lists of saints.  The reference at the end to saints “sawn in two” is puzzling; there is a statement in the “Ascension of Moses” that Isaiah was so treated, but this apocryphal work is thought to be later than the epistle, if not medieval.

 

The imagery of the final chapters reaches great heights  -- as we have noted before, more like a speech or a sermon than a letter, though there are some personal references at the end.  Did someone send out a transcript of a sermon, and add a few greetings?

We did a review of the Pauline epistles, and produced a chart of one-liner summaries.  This chart is in the "One-Liners" category.

We read chapters 9 and 10 of Hebrews, leaving 11-13 to the following week.

The writer continues his dense comparison of the duties of a high priest in the Temple with the role of Jesus as Redeemer.

The writer describes the contents of the Ark of The Covenant in the Holy of Holies; references in the Old Testament differ as to what these contents were, butit is possible that they changed over time.  The Ark is shown being carried away by Roman soldiers on the celebratory Arch of Titus in Rome; it current whereabouts are unknown, though one church in Ethiopia claimsto hold it.  It has been the subject of much revisionist history, from "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" to "Raiders of the Lost Ark".

Statements which are ascribed to Jesus and to the Holy Spirit are quotations from the Septuagint.  This supports that the idea that New Testament writers used a "bookof sayings" that did not always give the provenance of the quotations.

Chapters 5 thru 8 of Hebrews do a complicated piece of bible study based on Exodus 28 and Psalm 50. The writer theorises that Jesus followed the pattern of the mysterious figure Melchizedek. Without beginning or end, Jesus takes the place of the high priest who officiated in the Jerusalem Temple in a new temple in the heavens. The theology is complicated and somewhat non-Pauline. Would Paul have talked of Jesus "learning obedience" or entering the Holy of Holies?

Hebrews 1-4. The "Epistle to the Hebrews" prsents a puzzle, because no early manuscript contains the name of the author, or of the adressee. An early Bishop of Rome, Clement, thought that Paul must have written it in Hebrew, and got Luke to translate it into Greek. Tertullian, writing atthe very beginning of the Third Century, thought that it was written by Barnabas. Martin Luther put forward the idea that it was written by Apollos. The English scholar and archeologist, Dr. Ramsey, prosed that it was written by Philip The German theologian Hernack, made the startling suggestion that it was written by Priscilla, which might make it easier to explain why the author's name was removed from early documents. This argument is developed in the Wikipedia reference. Some have suggested, on the basis of its elegant, well-thought out Greek,, that it is not a letter at all, but a transcript of an early sermon, which would make it the only complete sermon to have survived from the early church. The record of Stephen's partial sermon in Acts is rather similar. When was it written The author spends much time arguing that temple ritual had been superseded. However, the destruction of the temple is not mentioned, suggesting that the letter was written before 70 AD. Clement quotes from it in around 90 AD To whom was it written? The only direct hint is the mention of "those who are from Italy" at the end of the letter, perhaps indicating that the letter was written to Rome. The heavy emphasis on arguments that Jesus outranks all other authorities, inlcuding angels, reminds many of the arguments against Gnostics (or proto-Gnostics) in Colossians, suggesting that it was written for a similar purpose. its focus on Jews suggests that it was written to a Jewish community. One suggestion has been that it is addressed to a community of Jewish ex-priests, (mentioned in Acts 6) under pressure to return to the temple. Other suggestions have been Jewish Christians, disappointed by the non-arrival of the Second Coming, tempted to return to orthodox Judaism. Other Jewish Christians may need instruction on the universalist aspect of Christianity, as against the nationalistic Judaism of c. 60 AD.   more »

The Epistle to Titus is a short letter, and reads to at least one commentator to describe it as "a Reader's Digest version of I Timothy", to which it is indeed very similar in content. The epistle describes the qualifications for bishop, deacon, and elder, though one wonders whether some of the qualifications do not apply to the laity as well ("The bishop should not be a drunkard"). The emphasis on church discipline reflects the transition to an institutional church, such as we find in the Second Century. The stress on the subordinate role of women comes strangely to current ears, and seems to conflict with Paul's reliance on such women as Priscilla and Phoebe.

It is difficult to place the letter in the context of Acts -- Paul is at liberty and planning to winter in Nicopolis, on the Western coast of Greece, very close to the battle site of Actium. This cannot be fitted into the Acts chronology, and some have suggested that the letter belongs to a missionary period after Paul was (presumably) released after his first trial in Rome. However, Eusebius suggests that Paul went West -- "to the Pillars of Hercules" (Gibraltar).

Paul is in prison, awaiting trial, and not expecting to survive.  He is alone but for Luke, and writes an urgent letter to Timothy, asking him to come before winter, and to bring his manuscripts, and his cloak.  Some of the writing reflects bitterness over the enemies he has made -- he mentions "Alexander the coppersmith", who may be the same Alexander we met in Acts 19 in the riots at Ephesus.  However, he sends personal greetings to a list of friends.

In Chapter 2, was Paul writing ex cathedra about the role of women in the church?  Or do we have, rather, some professional tips to one of his bishops about how to deal with disorder in his church – “What I do, Timothy, is not to let the women be teachers of the men…. And I tell them not to speak in church…..” Paul does not speak here as one with authority – compare “in the presence of God I charge you” in Chapter 6.

In Chapter 5, Paul has some complicated instructions about how to treat widows.  Commentators have surmised that there was some kind of formal arrangement, whereby those on the “Widows’ List” were financially supported by the church.  Paul thinks such payments should be restricted to the older, respected, widows in the church, and not made to young widowed women on the lookout for replacement husbands.

Again, there are instructions about the qualifications for elders , and in Chapter 6, instructions to slaves to carry out their duties responsibly.

Finally, Paul warns against the temptation of pursuing esoteric “knowledge” – gnosis – which may damage the faith.

 

We returned to I Timothy on Easter Day, April 12, for a closer look.

Chapter 1: Paul and Timothy

Paul's opponents teach the (Jewish) law, and are also obsessed with "myths and genaologies". This corresponds with no organized group that we know of, and may have been peculiar to Ephesus.

We were puzzled by Paul's reference to "slavetraders" (Ch 1:10 NIV) in his list of evil people whom the law exists to regulate. As we saw with the letter to Philemon, Paul seemed to have no particular objection to slavery as an institution. the word -- andrapodistes -- does not occur elsewhere in the NT, and seems to mean something like "menstealers". John cited the case of those in the US Civil War who captured ex-slaves to return them to slavery, and suggested the rendering "kidnappers".

Did Paul excommunicate Hymnenaeus and Alexander, and how can "delivering them to satan" teach them not to blaspheme? We shall meet Hymenaeus, at least, again in II Timothy.

 

Chapter 2: Worship and Order

Paul calls for prayers for those in authority, which seems to indicate that the letter was written either before the Neronian persecutions or much later.

We read Paul's strictures against particularly flamboyant female dress, and noted that some commentators have suggested this was to avoid the customs of some mystery cults, such as that of Cybele, who used distinctive headdress.

How can women be saved "by chidbirth"? Ronal Knox suggested that the reference was to the curse on Womanhood, which was redeemed by the bearing of the Christ Child by the archtypal Woman, the Virgin Mary.

Chapter 3: Discipline

The technical term in verse 1 - episkopos -- is translated as "bishop" in the KJV, and "overseer" in NIV. "Overseer" appeals to those who see I Timothy as written in an early stage of church development, and "bishop" to those who see the letter as written in the Second Century,when church organization had reached a more formal stage.

Cerainly the writer's emphasis on the married state of church officials contrasts with Paul's early letters, where marriage is seen as irrelevant in view of the imminence of the Second Coming.

We spent most of the class looking at arguments for detecting pseudepigraphy, in particular whether some of Paul’s letters were written by another author. Indicators of pseudepigraphy may be: 1. Change of vocabulary (e.g. Ephesians uses 116 words not found in the “un-disputed” letters) 2. Change in theology – e.g. {in Romans Paul attacks the idea that the resurrection has already come – in Colossians he assumes that it has) 3. Expressions change of meaning , e.g. Paul’s use of apparently Gnostic terminology in Colossians. 4. Discrepancies with Acts – e.g. Timothy’s movements as recounted in I Timothy compare with Acts 5. Anachronism – 1 Timothy seems to assume a fixed structure of bishops and deacons, which did not occur until later 6. Change of style All of these can be challenged. One counter argument is that the experts at the Council of Nicea, speaking the same language, and much closer in culture to the 1st century church, had no difficulty on approving the letters of Paul as authentic.   more »

Starting with "Finally...." -- Paul continues for another two chapters. He denounces his opponents, though it is not clear whether they are Jewish Christians or libertarians. We discussed the Jewish kosher laws, and their possible relevance to contamination caused by keeping milk in unglazed pottery.

Paul asks Eudoa and Syntyche to resolved their differences, and asks a mysterious "companion" to act as mediator. Possibly Paul is trying to reconcile two sects in the Philippian church.

He thanks Philippi for its financial assistance, and we were reminded of the backing that Paul received from the entrepreneur Lydia, in that city.

Philippi was founded by Philip pf Macedon to administer the silver mines in the area.  It became a major city, sited on the main roads to Rome (the Appian Way) and to Byzantium (Via Egnatia).  It was the site of the climactic battle between the army of Brutus and Cassius and the army of Octavian.  After the Battle of Actium, the survivors of the losing side were resettled in Philippi, which became a full Roman city, administered with Roman law, and with its inhabitants granted Roman citizenship. 

 

When Paul and Silas arrived there, on Paul’s Second Missionary Journey, they ran afoul of vested commercial interests, were beaten and thrown into prison.  An earthquake freed them from prison, but they refused to leave until the local magistrates personally escorted them out. The magistrates, learning that Paul and Silas were Roman citizens, were only too anxious to do so

 

Paul writes to Philippi from prison.  There is some discussion as to the city of the prison, but refers to a sympathetic audience in the praesidium, a term usually reserved for the Guards’ headquarters in Rome.  However, Paul writes as if within easy traveling distance of Philippi, so some prefer to think in terms of his imprisonment in Ephesus, about which little is known.  A third candidate is Caesarea Maritima, where Paul was under arrest by Roman military units.

 

Did Paul contemplate suicide?  One passage in Philippians can be read that way, but the group was unsympathetic to the idea.

 

Chapter Two contains what looks like all or part of an early Christian hymn.  It uses high Christology, describing a pre-creation Christ, who “emptied himself” to become man – what is known as Kenotic theology.

Epaphroditus had been sent from Philippi to look after Paul.

Chapter 3 starts with “Finally ----- “ with two more chapters to go.

The Epistle to Philemon qppears to be a letter from Paul to an important man in Colossae on behalf of his errant slave, Onesimus, whom Paul is sending back to his master. We compared the letter with an extant letter from Pliny the Younger, who wrote on behalf of a freedman who had misbehaved. This indicates that Paul may have been acting as an "amicus domini" to save Onesimus from punishment. Later, there was a bishop of Colossae named Onesimus, and, according to Ignatius, a bishop of Ephesus with the same name. If, as tradition suggests, these were all the same person, then Paul's letter may well have been effective. It has even been suggested that Onesimus was an early collector of Paul's letters, and kept the letter of Philemon in the collection as a personal reference. Did Paul ask Philemon top give Onesimus his freedom? This is not explicitly stated, but some early church documents show that the church had no difficulty with master and slave both being Christians, the latter being a slave "according to the flesh" while a brother "in the spirit". Paul asks that Onesimus be a a brother in the spirit and in the flesh, implying a requested change of legal status for Onesimus.

Chapter 4 contains a remarkable piece of "bible study" that on the face of it is a misreading of a verse from Psalm 68, wrenched out of context, and apparently misquoted (though possibly Paul was quoting the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew). Throughout the Epistles there is the question as to whether Paul felt it reasonable to quote short passages out of context. Conceivably he carried with him a set of "useful quotations" rather than a complete set of Hebrew sacred literature.

Chapter 5 has a section on Christian living, similar to the corresponding section in Colossians, unappealing today for its subservient view of women and its acceptance of slavery as an institution.

Verse 12 of chapter 6 seems to take gnostic terminology for granted, with its talk of "archons" and heavenly powers. As in several epistles it talks of "heavens" and the possibility of traveling between them.

Was Paul a prisoner when the letter was written? The phrase at the start of Chapter 4 is "Paul, a prisoner in Jesus Christ", so it might be that Paul is speaking metaphorically, as he does when referring to himself as a "slave of Christ". However, it is rather more difficult to apply that argument to the phase "an ambassador in a chain" in Chapter 5.

Was Aslan inspired by Roger Lancelyn Green's tiger?

Does the Ring in The Lord of the Rings represent a nuclear weapon?

C.S. Lewis applies the techniques of biblical criticism to some 20th century literature, with surprising results.

 

http://members.tripod.com/orthodox-web/papers/fern_seed.html

 

The document shows many similarities to the Epistle to the Colossians, and appears to attack Gnostic or proto-Gnostic tendancies. The writer seems not averse to using Gnostic terminology himself; there are references to archons, powers, and principalities, and well as several references to multiple heavens. As with Colossians, the emphasis is on the supremacy of Christ above all such concepts.

 

 

 

We reviewed some of the arguments for considering Colossians to be non-Pauline, and looked in detail at the apparent conflict between Colossians 3:1 (and 2:12) -- which describes Christians as having already been resurrected -- and Romans 6:4 -- which says that their resurrection is yet to come. This discrepancy has been cited as evidence for non-Pauline authorship of Colossians, but the group saw it more as rhetorical overkill, partcularly if the passage is seen as starting at 2:20 and continuing through 3:4.

We also looked at the Haustafeln passage in 3:18-4:1, which hints at a longer term approach to Christian living, compared with the tendancy in other Pauline letters to think in terms of an imminent Second Coming.