The Preaching of Peter. (1st - mid 2nd c. Egypt) Questions. (Solved)

Status
Not open for further replies.

rakovsky

Newbie
Apr 8, 2004
2,552
557
Pennsylvania
✟67,675.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The Preaching of Peter is a 1st to mid 2nd century Christian document, probably written in Egypt. Clement of Alexandria (2nd c.) cited it as if it were a real record of Peter's preaching (“Peter says in the Preaching”). Origen (early 3rd c.) apparently called the same book "the Teaching (or 'Doctrine') of Peter" and said that Heracleon (a late 2nd c. gnostic in southern Italy) used it. Since it came from Egypt and was treated authoritatively by Clement of Alexandria, I would like to please ask here on the Oriental Orthodox forum about it. I am in the process of learning about the possible 1st c. Christian writings because they came from the time of the apostles or those who knew them.
Heracleon was a Gnostic who flourished about AD 175, probably in the south of Italy. He is described by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. iv. 9) as the most esteemed... of the school of Valentinus; and, according to Origen..., said to have been in personal contact... with Valentinus himself. Heracleon - Wikipedia
If Heracleon had a copy in Italy, I can understand that the Preaching of Peter could be genuine, as Peter and Valentinus (who lived from 100 to 160 AD) were in Rome. Besides that, Mark was a student of Peter and moved to Alexandria in Egypt.

Here are M.R. James' collection of excerpts from the Preaching of Peter in James' book The Apocryphal New Testament: The Preaching of Peter
Here is Ben Smith's collection on his Text Excavation website: The preaching of Peter.

(Question #1) According to scholars, there was a separate, gnostic-influenced document from 180 AD called "Kerygmata Petrou". The distinction between the two documents is a little confusing for me, because Kerygma means "preaching".
Kerygma (from the ancient Greek word κῆρυγμα kẽrugma) is a Greek word used in the New Testament for "preaching" (see Luke 4:18-19, Romans 10:14, Matthew 3:1). It is related to the Greek verb κηρύσσω kērússō, literally meaning "to cry or proclaim as a herald" and being used in the sense of "to proclaim, announce, preach". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerygma

On the other hand:
In his work On First Principles, Origen says that the Teaching of Peter is not by Peter or anyone else inspired by the spirit and is not counted among the books of the church. Eusebius in his Church History (iii. 3. 2, A.D. 326) groups the Preaching with the Acts of Peter, the Gospel of Peter, and the Revelation of Peter as not accepted by standard Christianity and not appealed to by church writers. Indeed, of all the works claiming the name of Peter, Eusebius accepted only the first epistle as his work (Church History iii. 3. 1). http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0833/_P1F.HTM

So the book's identity and its reliability is an interesting question. What do you think?

(Question #2) The Encyclopedia of the Bible says that some quotations from it
record a post-resurrection discourse of Jesus, in which He bids the disciples to go out into the world after twelve years “that no one may say: We have not heard it,”... The twelve-year period (evidently of mission confined to Israel) appears also in other lit[erature.]
The 12 year period of preaching only in Israel is interesting. Does it sound correct?
Scholars suggest that St. Peter likely went to Rome to preach first in about 42-43 AD, that is, about 10 years after Jesus' death. Besides that, didn't Peter go to Phoenicia and Antioch to preach in the 12 years after the resurrection? But maybe that does not really count though if Israel had conquered those places in the past, and Jesus had preached there? Or maybe I am being too strict about the 12 years, and just because Jesus said to go abroad and preach after 12 years doesn't mean that he forbade them from preaching abroad before the 12 years were up, only that he wanted them to concentrate their efforts more abroad after the 12 years.

(Question #3) The Preaching of Peter says:
Neither worship ye him as do the Jews, for they, who suppose that they alone know God, do not know him, serving angels and archangels, the month and the moon: and if no moon be seen, they do not celebrate what is called the first sabbath, nor keep the new moon, nor the days of unleavened bread, nor the feast (of tabernacles?), nor the great day (of atonement).
I am not sure what he means about "serving angels". By "serving the month and the moon", does he mean that they observe their feasts based on whether the moon is seen? Or does he mean that they practice astrology? The Zodiac has been found in art in one or two ancient synagogues in the Levant.

(Question # 4) Clement of Alexandria may have referred to the Preaching of Peter in passing and found it similar to Paul's teaching on the topic of how God inspired Greek writers to teach about God:
And further, he[Paul] shows that the same God that furnished both covenants was the giver of Greek philosophy to the Greeks, by which the almighty is glorified among the Greeks. And it is clear from this. Accordingly, then, from the Hellenic training and also from that of the law are gathered into the one race of the saved people those who accept faith, not that the three peoples are separated by time, so that one might suppose three natures, but rather trained in different covenants of the one Lord, by the word of the one Lord.

For, in addition to the preaching of Peter, the apostle Paul will show that, as God wished to save the Jews by giving to them prophets, and also by raising up prophets of their own in their own tongue as they were able to receive the beneficence of God, he distinguished the most excellent of the Greeks from the common herd, saying: Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And, taking Hystaspes, read and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating him and those that bear his name, and his faithful ones, and his patience, and his advent.
I would like to ask if you happen to be familiar with what Greek writers Clement of Alexandria is referring to in his passage? I think that he means that the Greek writers taught monotheism and belief in the Messiah or God's Son.

Bp. Theophilus of Antioch (late 2nd c.) quotes the Sibyl, who predicted the future, as saying:
God is one,
Who rules alone, supremely great, unborn,
Almighty and invisible, himself
Alone beholding all things, but not seen
Is he himself by any mortal flesh.
Appendices

Encyclopedia Iranica says about Hystaspes:
HYSTASPES, ORACLES OF (Gk. Khrēseis Hystaspou), a collection of prophecies ascribed to Vištāspa, the patron and follower of Zarathustra, whom the Middle Iranian and part of the ancient tradition also identified with Darius’s father (J. Bidez and F. Cumont, I, p. 215, n. 3). The text of the work is not extant, except for resumés in Greek and Latin, attributable to the Oracles if they mention the name Hystaspes and contain prophetic material.
..
It is not easy to obtain a definite picture about the Hystaspes oracles from these data [preserved in Christian writers' records like Lactantius'], even if we acknowledge the fact that the work included several prophecies with different contents. What is obvious is the juxtaposition of explicitly Christian (nos. 2, 5) and non-Christian or neutral (nos. 1, 3, 4) statements. Ernst Kuhn is probably the only scholar to have given unequivocal support to a Christian origin of the oracles. ... All other investigations lead to the assumption of a Christian rearrangement of a non-Christian collection of oracles, in which the precise “heathen” proportion is problematic:

HYSTASPES, ORACLES OF – Encyclopaedia Iranica
 
Last edited:

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,499
13,648
✟426,073.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Do you have a link to the actual document in question? Sorry if it's in the links somewhere already posted and I just missed it (I'm sick at the moment, so my brain is very foggy), but I've seen the reference in St. Clement of Alexandria (he is a saint in the Coptic Orthodox Church), but never bothered to track down the actual document in question because of other sources like you've pointed out which cause some confusion surrounding its acceptability. If I recall correctly, St. Clement also references other documents that were circulating in Egypt in his time and before, such as the Gospel of the Egyptians (of which there are apparently Christian and Gnostic 'versions', probably not related but by the title; this is somewhat similar to the Preaching of Peter situation, it seems) which is likewise not accepted in our Church.

Regarding the Greek philosophers, I don't know Sibyl specifically, but your reading of that passage seems plausible. It's good here to remember that many of the early Egyptian saints, even up to and including my own baptismal saint, St. Shenouda the Archimandrite (or to Westerners 'Shenoute', the father of theology in Coptic, d. 465), received classical Greek educations, and hence would have known a lot more of the classical Greek philosophers and their systems of thought than we know today.

I don't really know what to say about the passage from the Preaching of Peter that you quote regarding the moon and feasts, as I've never seen the document and it has no status in our Church. Please remember that just because something belongs to Egypt doesn't mean it necessarily has any bearing on anything the Coptic Orthodox Church or any of its sister churches do or believe. This Preaching of Peter is one of many early Christian writings connected to Egypt that are in our time a kind of curiosity, and of course interesting if you are studying the development of Egyptian Christianity in particular, but nothing beyond that.
 
Upvote 0

rakovsky

Newbie
Apr 8, 2004
2,552
557
Pennsylvania
✟67,675.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Dear Dzheremi,
Thanks for replying. I'm sorry to hear that you are sick with brain fog. Maybe some Green Tea and Peppermint will help clear it up. That's what I use.
I edited the OP to include links to surviving excerpts from The Preaching of Peter. I value your thoughts about such early writings from the Christian community in Egypt.
 
Upvote 0

Erik Nelson

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 6, 2017
5,117
1,649
46
Utah
✟347,045.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
...(Question #2) The Encyclopedia of the Bible says that some quotations from it
The 12 year period of preaching only in Israel is interesting. Does it sound correct?
Scholars suggest that St. Peter likely went to Rome to preach first in about 42-43 AD, that is, about 10 years after Jesus' death. Besides that, didn't Peter go to Phoenicia and Antioch to preach in the 12 years after the resurrection? But maybe that does not really count though if Israel had conquered those places in the past, and Jesus had preached there? Or maybe I am being too strict about the 12 years, and just because Jesus said to go abroad and preach after 12 years doesn't mean that he forbade them from preaching abroad before the 12 years were up, only that he wanted them to concentrate their efforts more abroad after the 12 years.

(Question #3) The Preaching of Peter says:
I am not sure what he means about "serving angels". By "serving the month and the moon", does he mean that they observe their feasts based on whether the moon is seen? Or does he mean that they practice astrology? The Zodiac has been found in art in one or two ancient synagogues in the Levant.

(Question # 4) Clement of Alexandria may have referred to the Preaching of Peter in passing and found it similar to Paul's teaching on the topic of how God inspired Greek writers to teach about God:

I would like to ask if you happen to be familiar with what Greek writers Clement of Alexandria is referring to in his passage? I think that he means that the Greek writers taught monotheism and belief in the Messiah or God's Son.

Bp. Theophilus of Antioch (late 2nd c.) quotes the Sibyl, who predicted the future, as saying:


Encyclopedia Iranica says about Hystaspes:
Hippolytus of Thebes about Mary mother of Jesus.jpg
 
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,499
13,648
✟426,073.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Seeing this thread bumped is reminding me that I never went back and looked at the links inserted into the OP. :oops: I still plan to do that!

But regarding the information so graciously provided by our friend Erik (thank you for it), I feel like I should note here that not all Coptic sources agree on the date when St. Mark came to Egypt, but they are within the range you might expect if there was such a delay in their going out. I have heard priests say regarding the myroon (I'm not sure the English word for this...is it myron? myrrh? It's the holy oil that is made for charisms in the Church) that they are following the method of making it that was taught to their predecessors by St. Mark himself in AD 46, while perhaps more 'official', or at least more scholarly, sources like the Coptic historian Iris Habib el Masri's two-volume History of the Copts places the holy apostle's arrival in Egypt in AD 51.

If we assume the event of Pentecost happened in AD 33 or thereabouts, there are 12 years between that and AD 45, and we might tack on another year to that for actual travel from Jerusalem to Alexandria or other details of St. Mark's life and preaching. AD 51 of course is considerably later, but there are other traditions concerning St. Mark's life and preaching that say (if I recall correctly; I believe I read this in one of Philip Jenkins' books) that he first went to his homeland of Libya and stayed and preached there for some time before going to Egypt. This could account for that time. I personally don't know what to believe of these stories (and I don't think the important point is the exact date anyway), but it's interesting to see how they may be different reflections of the same earlier tradition regarding a 12 year (or thereabout) delay in the sending out of His apostles and disciples.

Or maybe it's unrelated...but it's the first thing I thought of when I saw the page offered by Erik! :D I've always wondered about these different accounts, as there is (as far as I know) no such murkiness regarding the holy apostle's martyrdom, which is only ever given as occurring in AD 68 in every source I've ever read.

(A note on naming conventions, for any non-Coptic person who might read this: in our tradition, we don't really make a hard distinction between 'apostle' and 'disciple' in the sense that St. Mark wouldn't qualify here, because he was of the seventy, not the twelve. We call him an apostle in the same sense that saints in other traditions like Sts. Cyril and Methodius would be called "the Apostles to the Slavs". St. Mark is the apostle to the Egyptians, and maybe also the Libyans. We also, in common with the EO, may call a saint whose role in preserving and expanding the faith is akin to that of the apostles an apostle/apostolic, as we do with HH St. Athanasius, our twentieth Pope and Patriarch, who is called in English and in Arabic "St. Athanasius the Apostolic" -- Athanasius el Rasuli, though I believe for the sake of accuracy that the EO call such people "Equal-to-the-Apostles". We do still use the word disciple/tilmizu as well, as you can likewise say that St. Athanasius was the disciple of St. Anthony, the Father of the Monks.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: rakovsky
Upvote 0

rakovsky

Newbie
Apr 8, 2004
2,552
557
Pennsylvania
✟67,675.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Paul's Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology, By Rainer Riesner, p. 120
Erik,
Regarding Question 2 (about the 12 years of preaching confined to Israel), thanks for posting page 120 of Paul's Early Period. It made an interesting observation on the next page (p. 121), that when James the Lesser was killed, the apostles did not make a vote on who to replace him with, unlike in the case of Judas' replacement by Matthias. He proposed an interesting theory that they did not make a replacement for James because the "12" apostles were dedicated to preaching to Israel, which came from the 12 tribes. As part of this theory, James was killed about the end of a 12 year period that had been specially dedicated to preaching to Israel. This is an interesting issue, because I don't remember reading about such a special 12 year Israel-only preaching period. The Riesner puts together pieces of evidence for this, like Peter's arrival in Rome only occurring about 12 years after Jesus' death (c. 42 AD, 12 years after Riesner's theorized c. 30 AD crucifixion date). Riesner says that this notion of a 12 year special instruction period is also found in orthodox writers, and he cites Ambrosiana and Bede, but it's unfortunate that his citation isn't clear and he doesn't quote or explain what it was that they wrote.

Christianty in View's timeline of Paul's missions suggests that he started his mission work before the 12 years had ended:
36 Paul's conversion -
37 At Damascus
38 Flight from Damascus to Jerusalem, then to Tarsus -
39 - 43 Paul preaches in Syria and Cilicia, making his headquarters in Tarsus.

The Christian History Institute's Timeline has for Paul's beginning:
c. 33–36 Converted on the way to Damascus; spends three years in Arabia; returns to Damascus to preach Jesus as Messiah

c. 36 Flees Damascus because of persecution; visits Jerusalem and meets with the apostles

36–44 Preaches in Tarsus and surrounding region

Orthodox Wiki gives the following timeline for mission work within the first 12 years of the Great Commission:
In Jesus' Great Commission in the Gospels, there is nothing about a 12 year delay in preaching to gentiles, only that the gospel must be preached firstly to Israel. The Pentecost event's phenomenon of speaking in tongues seems to encourage preaching to the nations.

The Catholic Encyclopedia mentions Peter being in Antioch at least during Barnabas' time there, if not earlier, since it says that his interactions with the gentiles there made an impression on Paul and Barnabas there. Further, Peter served the Church in Antioch before moving to Rome. So if his time in Rome was about 12 years after Christ's resurrection, then it seems that Peter's time in Rome would have been even earlier.

Generation Word's Bible School notes date Jesus' death to 30 AD and also give dates for mission activity to gentiles from before 42 AD:
35 AD
· Saul converted on road to Damascus (Ac.9)
· Saul is in Damascus
· Saul leaves for Arabia (Gal.1:17)
36 AD
· Saul is in Arabia
37 AD
· Saul is in Arabia
38
· Saul returns to preach in Damascus
Saul flees to Tarsus in Cilicia (Ac.9:29,30)
39
· Saul preaches in Cilicia and Syria for
five years (Gal.1:21)
40
. Missionaries from Cyrene in North Africa
come to Antioch in Syria and preach to
the Gentiles (Ac.11:20)
· Saul is preaching in Cilicia and Syria

Acts 11 talks about Christians preaching abroad and sending Barnabas to Antioch, but this could be after the 12 years had ended:

19. Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only. 20. And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus. 21. And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord. 22. Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.
Richard Valkanet's Bible Timeline dates Jesus' death to 30 AD and the event above to 42 AD, which would be 12 years after the date that he theorizes for Jesus' death. Up until this point, the Book of Acts doesn't talk about the 12 Apostles going to places outside of Judea and Samaria. It talks about Peter's trip to Samaria in Acts 8:14-24, which the Bible Journey dates to 35 AD.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Erik Nelson
Upvote 0

rakovsky

Newbie
Apr 8, 2004
2,552
557
Pennsylvania
✟67,675.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Dzheremi,
For Question 1 (About the identity and reliability of the Preaching of Peter and the difference from the Kerygmata Petrou), answer must be that:
(A) The "Preaching or Peter" is the title of a lost text that Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and a few other early Church writers cite. Clement of Alexandria refers to it repeatedly in such statements as:
"And in the preaching of Peter you may find the Lord referred to as law and word." (Miscellanies 1.29) Origen referred to it, saying: "It is too much to set forth now the quotations of Heracleon taken from the book entitled The Preaching of Peter and dwell on them, inquiring about the book whether genuine or spurious or compounded of both elements..." (Origen, On John 13.17) Since Heracleon quoted it in c. 175 AD, the Preaching of Peter must be from that time or earlier. Some scholars think that Aristides based one of the passages in his Apology (120-130 AD) on the Preaching's passage about how the Jews served the angels and months. Certainly it appears that the two passages are closely related, with one being based on the other (although it could have been the other way around). Clement of Alexandria appeared to respect it, but Origen makes it sound quite unreliable. (He said that if someone wants to use the book called in Latin the "Teaching of Peter", then "it must first be responded to that person that this book is not held among the ecclesiastical books, and [then] demonstrated that it was written neither by Peter nor by any other one who was inspired by the spirit of God.") But since it isn't certain that the Teaching of Peter and Preaching of Peter are the same book, and since Origen did not go ahead and demonstrate that neither Peter nor another inspired writer created it, I feel that the case is not closed on the question.
(B) The "Kerygmata Petrou" is a title that modern scholars appear to use for a theorized text from about the third century that they propose was a foundation for the 4th century Clementine Recognitions and Clementine Homilies. The theorized document is incompletely reconstructed based on quotations from the Clementines such as, "Then Peter: 'As to the mixture of truth with falsehood, I remember that on one occasion He, finding fault with the Sadducees, said....' (Homilies III 48-52)

For Question 2 (Whether the 12 years' stay in Israel by the apostles after Jesus rose sounds correct), it seems that if Peter went to Rome about 12 years later in c. 42 AD, but had already founded Antioch as a major Christian center, then he probably had already been evangelizing in Antioch. Paul had certainly already been doing mission work in those 12 years, but he wasn't one of the 12 disciples, so Paul apparently doesn't count.

The relevant passage is taken from Clement of Alexandria's Stromata:
Therefore asserts Peter that the Lord said to the Apostles: 'If any one of Israel should repent and by my name believe in God, his sins shall be forgiven him. After twelve years go forth into the world, that no one may say: 'We have not heard.'
Clement of Alexandria, Stromata VI, 5, 43.

To answer your question about the chrism oil
, in English it is called "Myrrh", but I know what you mean, because it is called "Miro" in Russian. The Russians call oil anointing "miro pomazanie." The Greek term is "Miron", meaning aromatic oil.

If Peter went to Rome about 12 years after the resurrection and St. Mark was with Peter in Rome, and then St. Mark went on to write or preach his Gospel in Alexandria, it makes sense that Mark would be in Egypt at least 12 years after the Resurrection. As for St Mark preaching in his homeland Libya before going to Alexandria, this possibility would agree with Acts 11's reference to Christians from "Cyrene" (Libya) traveling the Eastern Mediterranean to preach. In that case, St. Mark first preached in Libya (probably during the first 12 years of the apostles' preaching), and then came to Antioch, and then went on to Rome and Alexandria. But since St Mark wasn't one of the 12 disciples, his early preaching in his homeland of Libya wouldn't disprove the "12 year Israel-only" preaching theory about the disciples.

For Question 3 (what does it mean about the Jews "serving angels" and "serving the month and the moon"?), it's worth noting that another early writing, The Apology of Aristides, says something similar about the Jews: "whereas by their mode of observance it is to the angels and not to God that their service is rendered:--as when they celebrate sabbaths and the beginning of the months, and feasts of unleavened bread, and a great fast; and fasting and circumcision and the purification of meats, which things, however, they do not observe perfectly." (Apology, Section XIV)
Rev. Herbert Lucas comments:
This charge against the Jews of serving angels rather than God, suggests such passages as Col. ii. 16,18, where Jewish observances are mentioned in connection with a 'religion of angels;' and again, Heb. ii.5: 'For God hath not subjected to angels the world to come,' ie the world under the New Dispensation. The fundamental idea underlying the Apostle's words seems to be that the Old Dispensation having been communicated to men by the ministry of angels [Gal 3:19], to adhere to the old ordinances after the ministry of angels, to adhere to the old ordinances after the establishment of the New Covenant is in a manner to prefer angels to God Himself.
Source: The Month, Vol. 72.
Galatians 3:19 says that the Law "was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator."
Colossians 2:16-18 goes:
16. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17. Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
18. Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind
Graham Stanton comments in his essay "Worship: Pliny and the Kerygma Petrou" that the reference in the Preaching of Peter (which he calls the Kerygma Petrou)
to the shining of the moon as a pre-requisite for the celebration of the first Sabbath, the new moon, and the three great annual festivals is elucidated by the Mishnaic tractate, Roch ha-Shanah 1.1-3.1. At the time the Kerygma Petrou was written, and probably until the first half of the fourth century AD, the duration of each month (and hence the date of the festivals) was not fixed in advance; it had to be determined by observation of the new moon's appearance by trustworthy witnesses. If the sky was covered by clouds, then the new moon could not be hallowed. Following formal declaration of observation of the new moon, messengers were sent to the diaspora. According to rabbinic traditions which are difficult to date, if the messengers did not reach the diaspora in time for Passover, Tabernaces or the Day of Atonement, an additional festival day could be observed in order to provide for doubts.

The author of the Kerygma Petrou would not have bothered to comment in detail and to pour scorn on these practices unless he and his readers knew about them at first hand. We do in fact have evidence which confirms that it was the general practice in synagogues of the diaspora to celebrate new moons and the annual festivals, as well as the Sabbath.
Stanton notes that in Galatians 4, Paul complained about the Galatians' past service of non-deities and their turning to "observance" of months:
8. Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
9. But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
10. Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
In Romans 14:5, Paul noted that, "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." So Paul didn't consider special observances in honor of certain days to be an important issue. This goes back to Colossians 2:16 ("Let no man therefore judge you... in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days".)
Stanton writes that the polemic against observance of sabbaths and months goes back to Isaiah1:
13. Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.
14. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.
In The Antenicene Pascha: A Rhetorical History, Karl Gerlach writes:
Beyond the seven-day rhythm of the sabbath, the basic unit of the Hebrew calendar was the month, whose inaugural day, the sighting of the new crescent, was accomplished by ritual acts unique in the ancient world. With the conservatism that marks virtually all ritual practice, these rites would remain stable even as calendrical knowledge might have been absorbed from Babylon or Egypt, especially as they involved community participation in dighting the elusive new crescent. Thus while the weekly and yearly cycles of Hebrew timekeeping were modified as they were adopted into Christianity, the monthly cycle with its 'moongazing' could become an easy object of anti-Judaic polemic. The Talmud records a hallowing ritual for first century Palestine. Witnesses, for whom banquets were prepared to insure their eager attendance, gathered for the hallowing of the new moon in a large courtyard in Jerusalem called Beth Yazeq, and R. Gamaliel the Elder ordered that they be permitted to walk within two thousand cubits on the Sabbath. There was a brief liturgy: the chief of the court would say, 'It is hallowed,' which was repeated twice by the people.
Scholars seem to have different opinions on whether and how frequently veneration of angels was a Jewish practice in the First Century, to which the Preaching of Peter could be referring. (See eg. Angel Veneration and Christology, by Loren T. Stuckenbruck. pp. 140-147.)
It looks like Colossians 2:18 is the most relevant, because it warns against people who criticize others for failing to worship angels. Lopuhin comments about this verse:
In what exactly this service to angels consisted of is unknown, but, obviously, the false teachers performed in their honor some kinds of rituals (this is indicated by the meaning of 'service' with the term thriskia). This service was rooted in some regions of Asia Minor so much that in the year 365, the fathers of the Laodicean Council threatened an anathema for adhering to it.

For Question 4 (Are you familiar with the Greek writers to whom Clement of Alexandria is referring?), Clement is referring to two Hellenic writings in particular, the Sibylline oracles and the writings of Hystaspes, when Clement writes that Paul
"distinguished the most excellent of the Greeks from the common herd, saying: Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And, taking Hystaspes, read and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the son of God described".
Out of these writings, I've read the surviving Christian volumes of the Sibylline Oracles, but am not particularly familiar with the 6th century BC governor Hystaspes, also known as "Vishtaspa", whom Wikipedia notes "was a Persian satrap of Bactria and Persis. He was the father of Darius I, king of the Achaemenid Empire, and Artabanus, who was a trusted advisor to both his brother Darius as well as Darius's son and successor, Xerxes I."

The sibyls were Greek and Roman prophetesses living in Greece, Italy, and Asia Minor, and their "oracles" were written down. But the full volumes that have been handed down to us are apparently Christian versions that probably included materials from the earlier pagan sibylline oracles.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: dzheremi
Upvote 0

Joy

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2004
44,847
3,358
B'ham
✟1,403,923.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
MOD HAT ON

After Staff Review

Thread is Now
Permanently Closed
Re: SoP Violation

Statement of Purpose - The Voice In The Desert - Oriental Orthodox Statement of Faith

House Rules-
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.