hill epapost1999

The Epistula Apostolorum: An Asian Tract from the Time of Polycarp

Hill, Charles E. (Charles Evan), 1956-

Journal of Early Christian Studies, Volume 7, Number 1, Spring1999, pp. 1-53 (Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University PressDOI: 10.1353/earl.1999.0017

For additional information about this article

Access Provided by Marquette University at 02/19/11 1:05PM GMT

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/earl/summary/v007/7.1hill.html

AUTHORS LAST NAME/SHORT TITLE 1

Journal of Early Christian Studies 7:1, 153 1999 The Johns Hopkins University Press

The Epistula Apostolorum:An Asian Tract from theTime of Polycarp

CHARLES E. HILL

Despite a clear preference for Egypt on the part of many recent scholars, areview of the evidence shows that Carl Schmidt was correct in assigning theEpistula Apostolorum to Asia Minor. Literary and theological affinities withother Asian works, the social setting of the author and his group, and thehistorical circumstances visible in this pseudepigraphon, including theexperience of earthquakes, plague, and persecution, combine to place theEpistula in Asia Minor in the first half of the second century. Two datesemerge as the most likely for the composition of the Epistula: just before 120,or in the 140s. The Epistula may therefore be used with confidence to enhanceour understanding of the development of Christianity within the sometimeshostile environment in Asia Minor in this period.

The trials and community concerns of one segment of second-centuryChristianity are preserved in a fascinating pseudepigraphal documentnow known by the name of the Epistula Apostolorum. Despite someaffinities with gnostic texts, this purported epistle from Jesus apostlespositions itself as staunchly orthodox as over against some othergroup which bears the name of Christian but which holds to some formof docetism. The self-understanding of the authors community is definedin no small measure by its difference from the rival Christian group, adifference measurable in both sociological and theological terms. Thoughits fictional setting as a dialogue with the Savior in the days immediatelyfollowing his resurrection logically precludes it from citing any NewTestament texts as such, it knows a great deal of our present NewTestament, and certainly some apocryphal sources (whether oral orwritten). Its extensive knowledge of and special love for the Fourth

2 JOURNAL OF EARLY CHRISTIAN STUDIES

Gospel is one of its remarkable features and has been noted widely by itsmodern students.

But where and when did the community exist for whom this authorwrote? Neither the date nor the provenance of the Ep. Apost. has everbeen fully settled. In 1919 Carl Schmidt in his magisterial study and theeditio princeps of the Coptic version assigned the Ep. Apost. to AsiaMinor during the decade 16070,1 but his position has been all butabandoned by more recent scholars. Though some continue to prefer thesecond half of the second century,2 the trend has been towards asomewhat earlier date, with Hugo Deunsing, Manfred Hornschuh, J. J.Gunther, and C. D. G. Mller all placing it at or before the midpoint ofthe century. Asia Minor too has been all but eclipsed.3 Deunsing andGunther wrote in favor of a Syrian milieu, and Hornschuh theorized thatthe author was a Jewish-Christian with roots in the primitive PalestinianChurch, writing in Egypt around 120.4 In the year before Hornschuhsstudy appeared, A. A. T. Ehrhardt had also argued for an Egyptianorigin, but for a later date towards the end of the second century.5 Sincethe studies of Ehrhardt and Hornschuh in the mid-1960s, Egypt has beenin the ascendancy. An Egyptian origin has been decisively adopted by

1. C. Schmidt and I. Wajnberg, Gesprche Jesu mit seinen Jngern nach derAuferstehung: Ein katholisch-apostoliches Sendschreiben des 2. Jahrhunderts. TU 43(Leipzig, 1919), 361402. Asian provenance was also upheld by K. Lake, TheBeginning of Christianity, part I: The Acts of the Apostles, v (London, 1933), 44.

2. J. K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993) [ANT], 556, saysthat the consensus of opinion puts it in the third quarter of the second century. H.Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development (Philadelphia,1990), 312, specifies only the second half of the second century.

3. After submitting this article, A. Stewart-Sykes important contribution, TheAsian Context of the New Prophecy and of Epistula Apostolorum, VC 51 (1997):41638, appeared. Stewart-Sykes also argues for an Asian provenance for theEpistula based mainly on similarities in theology and general religious atmospherebetween it and Montanism. Though I cannot endorse all of his arguments (inparticular cf. pp. 43336 with C. E. Hill, The Marriage of Montanism andMillennialism, Studia Patristica 26 [1992]: 14248), I am pleased to observe that hisindependent line of research supports and complements the present study.

4. Deunsing, Epistula Apostolorum, in Hennecke-Schneemelcher, New Testa-ment Apocrypha, 2 vols. (London, 1963), I:191; M. Hornschuh, Studien zur EpistulaApostolorum (Berlin, 1965), 11619; J. J. Gunther, Syrian Christian Dualism, VC25 (1971): 8193 at 91.

5. A. A. T. Ehrhardt, Judaeo-Christians in Egypt, the Epistula Apostolorum andthe Gospel to the Hebrews, in F. L. Cross, ed., Studia Evangelica 3 (TU 88, 1964):36082.

HILL/THE EPISTULA APOSTOLORUM 3

C. D. G. Mller in the second edition of New Testament Apocrypha6 andis now accepted or advocated by a number of scholars in recent works.7

In the course of studying the early effects of the Johannine literature inthe church I have been drawn to the conclusion that there is much moreto connect the Ep. Apost. with Asia Minor than has been noted by thepublished studies, even Schmidts, and that this material stands out moreclearly in comparison with the data cited for Egypt in particular. Mostpast attempts to locate the life setting of the Ep. Apost. have, notinappropriately, centered upon its apparent knowledge of NT materialsand on its literary or theological affinities with other literary sources. Butin the best of circumstances such literary comparisons can reveal onlypart of the picture. And in the present case, the often disputedprovenance of the documents to which the Ep. Apost. has beencompared has not allowed secure conclusions. Relatively little attentionso far has been paid to historical or social factors that might be exposedfrom the text, and yet, as we shall see, the text does offer us some helpfulpossibilities.

The following study intends to reopen both questions. It will concludethat Schmidt was justified in placing the work in Asia Minor, and willpropose and explore the most likely options for fixing the second-centurydate more specifically.

PRELIMINARY INDICATIONS OF DATE

As preliminary to our investigation, two pieces of data internal to theEpistula must be mentioned which have sometimes been used todetermine the time of composition. The one most often cited occurs inch. 17, where the author appears at first sight to offer the reader an easyterminus ante quem by placing the future return of Jesus when thehundredth part and the twentieth part is completed (Copt.). But this

6. C. D. G. Mller, Epistula Apostolorum, in Hennecke-Schneemelcher, NewTestament Apocrypha, rev. edn., 2 vols. (London, 1991), I:24951 [NTA].

7. E.g., H. Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, vol. 2: History andLiterature of Early Christianity (New York/Berlin, 1982), 23639; M. Hengel, Diejohannaeische Frage: Ein Lsungsversuch mit einem Beitrag zur Apokalypse von JrgFrey (Tbingen, 1993), 59; R. J. Bauckham, Papias and Polycrates on the Origin ofthe Fourth Gospel, JTS n.s. 44 (1993): 2469, at 66. J. Hills, Tradition andComposition in the Epistula Apostolorum, Harvard Dissertations in Religion (Phila-delphia, 1990), 9, leaves the question open, listing the three most likely places oforigin as Asia Minor, Egypt, or Syria. Elliott, ANT, 556, also states simply that AsiaMinor and Egypt are the two places most frequently favoured.


prediction has proved disappointingly slippery. Julian Hills has discov-ered eight different approaches among scholars, yielding a postulateddate for the parousia anywhere from 130 to 180.8 For starters, there is atextual problem, for the Ethiopic version9 reads, when the hundred andfiftieth year is completed. And even if we settle on the originality of the120 figure in the Coptic, supposing it to be much more likely that thedate was extended by the Ethiopic translator than that it was curtailedby the Coptic, there is then the question of when the count should begin.Though it may seem more natural to begin from the point at which Jesusis speaking, just before the ascension, some scholars have argued forstarting from the birth of Jesus.10 A common, working solution whichseems to have been adopted by several scholars is gained by accepting thefigure of 120 in the Coptic version and beginning the count from the timeof the fictional setting of the document, resulting in an expected date forthe parousia of around 150.11 Then, allowing that the author must havegiven the world some years before its expiration, a date for compositionshould be somewhere between, say, 135 and 145. If, on the other hand,the starting point is to be placed at the time of the incarnation, and theCoptic 120 is accepted, a date somewhat earlier than 120 would benecessary.

Another peculiarity of the text which has been cited as an indication ofits date is the assertion in ch. 9 that Jesus was crucified by (Copt.; Eth.,

8. Hills, Tradition, 116.9. The Ethiopic manuscripts offer the only complete version of the Ep. Apost., but

the Coptic translation is usually considered to be the earliest and perhaps the sourceof the Ethiopic. See Mller, Epistula, 250.

10. Notably L. Gry, La date de la parousie daprs lEpistula Apostolorum, RB40 (1940): 8697, and Hornschuh, Studien.

11. One could perhaps make a case that the second advent of Jesus was expectedby some other Christians to take place sometime near the middle of the secondcentury. Justin does not engage in any date-setting, but he does indicate that, since theLords ascension to heaven, the times are now running on to their consummation;and he whom Daniel foretells would have dominion for a time, and times, and a half,is even already at the door, about to speak blasphemous and daring things against theMost High (Dial. 32). The Man of Sin, then, was about to be manifested. Also, theMontanist theory of salvation history could be read as a response to the failure of anexpected coming of Jesus at about this time. This theory divided history into threegreat epochs, the first characterized by the Father and extending to the first coming ofChrist, the second from Christ to Montanus and characterized by the Son himself,and the third, the period of the Paraclete, beginning with the inspiration of Montanusand extending to the end (Passio Perpetuae et Felicitatis praef.; Tertullian, De virg.veland. 1), an end which Maximilla believed would follow shortly upon her demise.The failure of an expected return of Christ could have been partly assuaged by the riseof a new era of salvation when Montanus began to prophesy in the 160s.


in the days of) Pilate and one Archelaus. Mt 2.22 mentions anArchelaus, the son of Herod the Great, who ruled Judea after the deathof his father. But Archelaus was removed from office in 6 c.e. andbanished. J. de Zwaan suggested that Julius Archelaus, son of Helcias, ismeant (see Josephus, Ant. 19.354-55; 20.140, 147; Ap. 1.51), whichwould put the crucifixion in the 40s of the first century.12 De Zwaan tiesthis to Irenaeus notion, based upon a free interpretation of Jn 8.57 andsupported by some Asian traditions, that Jesus lived between forty andfifty years (AH 2.22.6). De Zwaan then takes the 150 years of theEthiopic version and arrives at the terminus ad quem of 200. But if theauthor knew anything about Julius Archelaus, then he must have knownthat this man was not a ruler of Palestine, least of all during theprocuratorship of Pontius Pilate.13 More plausibly, I think, the Ep.Apost.s assertion about Archelaus was simply based on too literal areading of Mt 3.1 without noting the temporal break from Mt 2.22.After mentioning Archelaus in 2.22, Matthew leaps over nearly threedecades right to the ministry of Jesus, but introduces 3.1 with the words,in those days. . . . To one unfamiliar with the governmental history ofPalestine, it could easily seem that Archelaus was still in office when Johnthe Baptist appeared on the scene. As for Irenaeus statement on thelength of Jesus life, it is possible that all Irenaeus had to claim fromAsian tradition before him was simply that the Fourth Gospel recordeda longer ministry than did the Synoptics, necessitating the conclusionthat Jesus lived well beyond thirty years.14

So much for a preliminary discussion of dates. We shall have more tosay on the subject after we examine other possible indications of thecircumstances of composition. We now treat the main proposals for theprovenance of Ep. Apost. As Egypt is the point of origin most discussedand favored in recent works, it is with Egypt that we begin.

12. J. de Zwaan, Date and Origin of the Epistle of the Eleven Apostles (GesprcheJesu mit seinen Jngern nach der Auferstehung), in H. G. Wood, ed., AmicitiaeCorolla: A Volume of Essays Presented to James Rendel Harris, D. Litt., on theOccasion of his Eightieth Birthday (London, 1933), 34455, at 349.

13. See Hills, Tradition, 78.14. See C. E. Hill, What Papias Said about John (and Luke): A New Papian

Fragment, JTS n.s. 49 (1998), 582629.


I. PROVENANCE

A. Egypt

1. A. A. T. Ehrhardt

As mentioned above, Ehrhardt argues forcefully that the author was aJewish Christian writing in Egypt.15 An important plank in his proof isthe proposition that the Ep. Apost. is dependent upon the EgyptianGospel of the Hebrews. Even if this were true, however, an Egyptianorigin for the Ep. Apost. would not be assured. Ehrhardt also proposesthat Ignatius of Antioch used the Gosp. Heb.,16 and this would have beenprior to the appearance of Ep. Apost. in any case. But if this does notmake Ignatius an Egyptian, it would not necessarily make the author ofEp. Apost. an Egyptian. And, more to the point, the alleged connectionswith Gosp. Heb. are open to most serious doubts. In particular, Ehrhardtfinds these two documents to be in agreement in denying a role to theHoly Spirit in the conception of Jesus.17 Ep. Apost. 14.518 says, For Ialone was a minister unto myself, in that which concerned Mary. ButEhrhardt has somehow passed by the confession in 3.2, we believe: theword, which became flesh through the holy virgin Mary, was carried(conceived) in her womb by the Holy Spirit. . . . And when Ehrhardtconcludes that Ep. Apost. 14.5 agrees with Gosp. Heb. in denying thatJesus partook of the humanity of Mary, it seems he has missed the pointof Ep. Apost. 14.5. While the Savior is pictured by the author of Ep.Apost. as saying, For I alone was a minister unto myself, in that whichconcerned Mary, the intention is not to deny a real participation inhuman flesh. The text goes on to say, I became flesh, and the truesarkic nature of Christs humanity is one of the foremost concerns of the

15. He states unequivocally, The truth is rather that E. A. was written in defenceof Judaeo-Christianity in Egypt (371). The Jewish-Christian viewpoint of the authoris said to be quite clearly expressed in Christs missionary command: Go and preachunto the twelve tribes, and preach also unto the heathen and to all the land of Israel,from the East unto the West, and from the South unto the North (371). But how isa Jewish-Christian milieu compatible with the prophetic oracle cited in ch. 33,Behold, out of the land of Syria I will begin to call a new Jerusalem, and I willsubdue Zion and it will be captured; and the barren one who has no children will befruitful and will be called the daughter of my Father, but to me, my bride; for so hasit pleased him who sent me?

16. Ehrhardt, Judeo-Christians, 36162.17. Ehrhardt, Judeo-Christians, 36364.18. I have followed the practice, suggested by Hills, of numbering the sentences of

each chapter as verses, as they appear in the English translation of NTA (2nd edn.).


tract. Nor does the author mean to deny Marys part in the incarnation19

(again, 3.2, we believe: the word, which became flesh through the holyvirgin Mary, was carried (conceived) in her womb by the Holy Spirit . . .).The point is rather to deny the participation of Joseph and the normalmethod of procreation. As he says in 21.2 (Eth.) without being begottenI was born (or, begotten) of man, and without having flesh I put onflesh, and again, stressing his possession of common humanity, in 19.20(Eth.), I have put on your flesh, in which I was born and died and wasburied and rose again through my heavenly Father. This is borne outagain by the christological use of Jn 1.13 in 3.2 (on which we shall havemore to say below). Thus there is really nothing in the Ep. Apost. whichcan be said to be in common with the docetic teaching of the Gosp.Heb. fragment in question, on which Ehrhardt lays such emphasis.

It has often been remarked that there are certain similarities betweenthe Ep. Apost. and a work known from the Jung Codex of the NagHammadi library, the so-called Apocryphon of James. Ehrhardt arguesthat the Asian origin of the Ep. Apost. is untenable at any rate if theconclusion of W. C. van Unnik is accepted that the Apocryphon ofJames, which is of Egyptian origin, was written between a.d. 125 and150. For it is certain that there are close similarities between this writingand E. A. which is later than this apocryphon. Consequently the authorof E. A. must have used it, and he could hardly have done so outsideEgypt.20 Mller accepts Ehrhardts reasoning.21 As it happens, however,both the Egyptian origin of the Apocryphon of James and the datingassumed by Ehrhardt for it are quite disputed. It is interesting to notethat in the introduction to the Apoc. Jas., which follows the Ep. Apost.directly in NTA2, Dankwart Kirchner actually favors a Syrian-Palestinian,not an Egyptian, provenance for the Apoc. Jas. and says, The similari-ties between Ap. Jas. and the Epistula Apostolorum are to be explainedby assuming that the latter is reacting to a spiritual situation represented,among others, by Ap. Jas. No literary dependence can be demon-strated.22 Other scholars too are not convinced that Apoc. Jas. origi-nated in Egypt where it was ultimately found. Pheme Perkins, forexample, argues for Asia Minor or western Syria sometime in the earlythird century a.d.23

19. contra Ehrhardt, Judeo-Christians, 366.20. Ehrhardt, Judeo-Christians, 367.21. Mller, Epistula, 251.22. Kirchner, The Apocryphon of James, NTA 1: 287.23. P. Perkins, Johannine Traditions in Ap. Jas. (NHC I.2), JBL 101 (1982):

40314, at 414. My own view, to be argued for elsewhere, is that the apocryphon is


2. M. Hornschuh

Manfred Hornschuh has presented by far the most extensive argu-ments for Egypt. Most of his points can be fairly briefly treated.

1) Citing Lietzmanns review of Schmidt in ZNW 20 (1921), Hornschuhsays that the surviving translations of the work place it in den unswohlbekannten rmisch-gyptischen Kreis, for it survives only inCoptic, Ethiopic, and Latin translations. But Hornschuh realizes that thisdoes not mean it circulated only in Egypt, Ethiopia, and the Latin West(it was after all first written in Greek), and so Hornschuh allows that thisargument has some weight, but is not decisive.24 One should observe herethat the ultimate preservation in African languages and reception amongthe Coptic churches may be due simply to a more open attitude in Egyptin the second century towards pseudepigraphal but useful Christianworks than tended to characterize the church elsewhere.

2) Hornschuh then observes that the works peculiar tendencies mighthave discouraged its acceptance anywhere but where it was first written.But on the other hand, he says, it might have been valued in Egypt for itsquasimonophysite Christology.25 Nor should we overlook another quitedifferent possibility, namely, that a work of known fictional qualitiesmight be read and perceived for what it was in its homeland but moreeasily misappropriated in a foreign land.

indeed probably from the first half of the second century, and that it may have comefrom Egypt or from Asia Minor. But the flow of apocryphal or heretical Christianworks North from Egypt was by no means necessarily slow. Irenaeus has a copy of theGospel of Truth and some version of the Apocryphon of John (AH 1.29), whichwould have come from either Rome or Egypt. And he has Carpocratian writingswhich probably came from Egypt (AH 1.25.4, 5). Connections between Egyptianreligion and Ephesus, for instance, at this time are well known from the archaeologi-cal remains. J. C. Walters, Egyptian Religions in Ephesos, in H. Koester, ed.,Ephesos: Metropolis of Asia. HTS 41 (Valley Forge, 1995), 281310, Extantevidence makes it appear that Christianity and the Egyptian cults were the onlyreligions from the East . . . that made significant inroads into the religious life ofEphesos (282); It seems that during the period of Christian expansion in Ephesos,the Egyptian cults also experienced something of a resurgence. Because of the relativeabsence of evidence for other foreign religions in Ephesos, particularly mystery cults,the metropolis of Asia may be a unique site where the contextualization of these tworeligions and their special appeal during this period could be jointly analyzed (305).It should also be observed that there was a temple and priesthood of Isis in Smyrna inthe second century, to whom the orator Aelius Aristides betook himself many times(C. J. Cadoux, Ancient Smyrna: A History of the City from the Earliest Times to 324A.D. [Oxford, 1938], 265, 271).

24. Hornschuh, Studien, 103.25. Hornschuh, Studien,1034.


3) Hornschuh also cites Lietzmanns argument that a passage in ch. 21,I am the hope of the hopeless, the helper of those who have no helper,the treasure of those in need, the physician of the sick, the resurrection ofthe dead contains a parallel with the Egyptian Liturgy of St. Mark (lvn tow pepedhmnouw . . . lpw tn pelpismnvn, bofiyeia tnbohyntvn).26 Hornschuh admits, however, that it is unlikely that theLiturgy of Mark got the phrase directly from Ep. Apost., and admits thatthe later liturgies borrowed from sources not exclusively Egyptian.27

Beyond this, parallels to this manner of speaking of Jesus exist in Asianwriters such as the author of Acts of Paul and Thecla and Melito ofSardis.28

4) In the Ethiopic translation of ch. 8, Martha is included among thewomen who carried ointment to Jesus grave (in the Coptic she is notpresent, but her name is given as the mother of one of the Maries).Hornschuh says Martha is so represented in an Egyptian amulet, and inthe Ambrosian Liturgie Mailand which has some roots in Egyptianliturgical practice. But he also admits that this tradition is also assumedby Hippolytus Commentary on the Song of Songs and is found in asixth-century Syrian Gospel manuscript.29

5) His next argument is most curious. He notes that the Ep. Apost.evidently knows the long ending of the Gospel of Mark and cites B. H.Streeter30 who calls it a characteristic Gallic and Italian reading, as itis found in Irenaeus, Tatian, and in Codex Bezae, but is notably absentfrom the Alexandrian text. Streeter also knows of its use in Ep. Apost.,

26. Hornschuh, Studien, 104.27. Hornschuh, Studien, 104.28. Acts of Paul and Thecla 3.37, For he alone is the goal of salvation and the

foundation of immortal life. To the stormtossed he is a refuge, to the oppressed relief,to the despairing shelter . . .; 42, Christ Jesus the Son of God, my helper in prison,my helper before governors, my helper in the fire, my helper among the beasts . . .;Melito of Sardis, I released the condemned; I brought the dead to life; I raised up theburied (Peri Pascha ll. 75557); The Lord, slain, saved us, and bound, released us,and sacrificed, ransomed us (Fr. 11); He is the repose of the dead, the finder of thelost, the light of those who are in darkness, the redeemer of the captives, the guide ofthe wanderers, the refuge of the forlorn. . . . (Fr. 15, ll. 5863); He was bound inorder to loose, he was flogged in order to pardon, he suffered passion for you by thecross to free you from passions, he died by the cross to make you alive by the cross,he was buried to raise you (NFr. II, ll. 13842); He is the reviver of the dead, andsaviour of the lost, and guide of the deceived, comforter of the oppressed, and saviourof the created, and shepherd of the sheep, and giver of rest to the weary, and salvationof the people . . . (NFr. II, ll. 18995).

29. Hornschuh, Studien, 1045.30. B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels (London, 1926), 70f.


which he thinks supports this works Ephesian origins. For Streeter, thisis one more piece of evidence for a special connection between most ofour earliest authorities of the Western text and the Roman province ofAsia.31 Hornschuh disputes this, however, arguing that Roman influencein Egypt is demonstrable in the early second century, and that knowledgeof the longer ending could have come from Rome to Egypt just as easilyas it could from Rome to Asia. As far as bare possibilities go, this isperhaps true. But the fact remains that the reading is attested in thesecond century in one (Irenaeus)32 and possibly two (Papias)33 Asians,and is unknown in Egypt! It does not appear in the most Egyptian ofmanuscripts of Mark, and, very tellingly, is not known by Clement orOrigen.34 It appears that this piece of evidence is decidedly in favor ofAsia.

6) The next point is just as revealing and involves the same response tomore observations made by Streeter. First, Streeter remarked that thename Judas Zelotes from the apostle list in ch. 2 is found in someEuropean (not African) Old Latin versions of Mt 10.3, and appears in amosaic in a baptistery in Ravenna.35 Second, Streeter caught thesignificance of the description of Christ in 3.2, the word which becameflesh through the holy virgin Mary . . . was born not by the lust of theflesh but by the will of God . . . as implying the famous Westernreading of Jn. i. 13, which substitutes w . . . gennfiyh for o gennfiyhsanand thereby makes the fourth Gospel also assert the Virgin Birth ofChrist. This reading is found in b, in three quotations of Irenaeus, two ofTertullian, and was also known to Ambrose, Augustine and probably to

31. Streeter, Four Gospels, 71.32. B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early

Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament (Oxford, 1993), 232,finds no earlier attestation than Irenaeus. B. M. Metzger, The Text of the NewTestament (Oxford, 1968), 227, thinks it is probable that Justin knows it, though hedoes not cite evidence. Justins phrase he has risen from the dead and ascended intoheaven (Dial. 108.2), possibly reflects Mk 16.19, but this is hard to confirm, as it isa commonplace and could be based on several NT passages. Metzger says that thelonger ending is included in Tatians Diatessaron. Tertullian also apparently has thelonger ending (de anima 25.8, probably apol. 21.23). None of this evidence, in anycase, points to Egypt.

33. A. F. Walls, Papias and Oral Tradition, VC 21 (1967): 13740, at 138.Papias relates from the daughters of Philip the story of Justus Barsabas drinkingpoison with no deleterious effects. This was likely seen as a fulfilment of Mk 16.18(HE 3.39.9).

34. Metzger, Text, 226, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Ammonius show noknowledge of the existence of these verses.

35. Streeter, Four Gospels, 70.


Justin Martyr.36 Hornschuh can do nothing but admit that this showsan affinity between the Ep. Apost. and the West, but answers that thesame argument may be used here as was used concerning the long endingof Mark. But that argument, as we have seen, was not a very good one.Again, this reading is known in the second century only in one who spenthis early Christian life in Asia before moving to Rome (Justin, Dial.63.2), in an Asian native (Irenaeus, AH 3.16.2; 19.2; 21.5, 7; 5.1.3), andis next found in one who was a student of the latters writings, Tertullian.On the other hand, this reading, or use, of Jn 1.13 is unknown toClement of Alexandria (Strom. 2.13.58), who assumes the collective textand interpretation without the slightest awareness of any variant, and itis apparently unknown to Origen, not occurring in his Greek citationsbut only in later Latin translations of his work. More to the point, noneof the surviving Alexandrian or proto-Alexandrian MSS (P66, 75 a B,etc.) contains the christological reading. This evidence then also points usdefinitely away from Egypt and towards Asia Minor, or parts west.

7) Hornschuh argues that the confessional statement in ch. 5, whichhas five elements, said to be the meaning of the five loaves offered for thefeeding of the 5,000, is also on the side of Egypt. The original triformconfession (with articles on the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost) wasin time expanded in Rome to the point where each of the three articlesbecame itself triform. The Ep. Apost. then represents a very oldintermediate form. But he cites no Egyptian formulae which can beshown to be early. He says, Das Glaubensbekenntnis der Ep. Ap. isentweder in Rom oder in gypten entstanden und verweist unsere Schriftwiederum in den rmisch-gyptischen Kreis.37 But no good reason isoffered why there should not be a Roman-Asian circle as well, or whythe credal forms presupposed in, for instance, Irenaeus, AH 1.10.1;5.20.1; Dem. 3, 6, 99, should not be allowed as parallels.38

8) Hornshuh says the religionsgeschichtliche Milieu of the docu-ment is typisch gyptisches, claiming its thoughts and conceptions arethose of altgyptischen Mythologie, des Hermetismus und der christlichen

36. Streeter, Four Gospels, 70.37. Hornschuh, Studien, 107.38. The Ep. Apost. adds two elements onto the basic triform confession. Irenaeus,

AH 5.20.1 adds four. All receive one and the same God the Father, and believe in thesame dispensation regarding the incarnation of the Son of God, and are cognizant ofthe same gift of the Spirit, and are conversant with the same commandments, andpreserve the same form of ecclesiastical constitution, and expect the same advent ofthe Lord, and await the same salvation of the complete man, that is, of the soul andbody.


gyptischen Gnosis.39 While there are certainly some idiosyncraticaspects of Ep. Apost. and even certain signs of influence from outsideblue-blooded second-century orthodoxy (whatever this might be), it ishard to measure the value of such impressionistic generalizations whentheir bases are not plainly stated.

9) Along these lines, Hornschuh then agrees with Lietzmanns insis-tence that Ep. Apost. has felt the impact of gnosticism more stronglythan Schmidt realized. This Lietzmann took as a sign of Egyptiansyncretism. Hornschuh hesitates here, however, and concedes, wisely,that gnostic influence on orthodox communities might have been felt inplaces other than Egypt alone.40

10) But there is one more point to be gained from gnosticism. The Ep.Apost. presents itself as a conversation between the Lord and hisdisciples after the resurrection, and Hornschuh rightly observes that thisis a genre popularized by Egyptian gnosticism.41 We have alreadycommented on the similarities in form between this work and theApocryphon of James. There is much to be said for the observation ofVielhauer that this represents evidently a conscious taking over of oneof the most typical gnostic forms for substantiating authoritativeteaching; it is thus a case of an attempt to combat the gnostic opponentswith their own weapons.42 And this could have been done in Egypt orin any place where such gnostic conventions were known, including AsiaMinor. We can point in fact to at least one pseudepigraphon written byan orthodox Asian, even a presbyter, only a little later: the Acts of Paul(Tertullian, de bapt. 17).

11) Now Hornschuh attempts to turn the tables on Schmidt and claimthe epistles predilection for the Fourth Gospel as a point in favor ofEgypt.43 For this he cites the discovery of P52 (a fragment of John 18)and the Egerton papyrus (a Gospel-like work which knows John) inEgypt, and their dating to the first half of the second century. But thatthese documents were found in Egypt does not necessarily mean thatthey were composed or even copied there.44 Our earliest copies of Luke,Matthew, Mark, Paul, and most of the rest of the NT were found in

39. Hornschuh, Studien, 107.40. Hornschuh, Studien, 108.41. Hornschuh, Studien, 108.42. P. Vielhauer, Geschichte der urchristlichen Literatur (Berlin, 1975), 687. The

translation is taken from Schneemelchers article, VIII. Dialogues of the Redeemer,in NTA2, 1:229.

43. Hornschuh, Studien, 109.44. As Hornschuh admits, Studien, 115.


Egypt as well. But as is well-known, this is only because the weatherconditions in Egypt are most favorable to the survival of papyri. Unlessthe Fourth Gospel itself was first composed in Egypt, it had to bebrought to Egypt from somewhere!45 And wherever that somewhere waswill also have to be considered a prime candidate for the provenance ofthe Ep. Apost.

Hornschuh fortifies these eleven arguments by asserting the allegedlyclose connection between Alexandrian and Roman Christianity in thesecond century. This is found in the legend of Mark going from Rome tofound the church in Alexandria, and in the conclusion drawn by C. H.Roberts from the fact that the Christian codex used papyrus (theEgyptian material) instead of parchment.46 But again, this will have littleforce as an argument against the province of Asia, which also had ademonstrably close connection with Rome,47 particularly before theoutbreak of the Quartodeciman controversy.

Hornschuh also says that our author spoke for a circle for whom theSynoptic Gospels were treasured.48 There is certainly some indication ofChristian use of these Gospels in Egypt in the first half of the secondcentury.49 But there is at least as much evidence for this in Asia Minor inPolycarp and Papias, before the time of the Mart. Polyc. and Irenaeus.

Despite the large number of Hornschuhs arguments for Egypt, wehave found that very few of them can carry much weight, particularlywhen Asia Minor is also in the running. Some of them actually favorAsia Minor instead, and others apply just as well to Asia Minor as toEgypt.

45. C. H. Roberts, Manuscript, Society and Belief in Early Christian Egypt(London, 1979), notes that POxy 405, a fragment from a roll of Irenaeus, AgainstHeresies, the original of which we know came from Gaul, not Egypt, made it toOxyrhynchus within twenty years of the production of the original, not long afterthe ink was dry on the authors manuscript (53).

46. Despite what one might think about the logical preference for parchment(which was evidently invented in Pergamum) in Asia Minor, one cannot draw anynecessary conclusions from this. In II John 12, a letter usually assigned to Asia Minor,the author speaks of his writing on xrthw, which refers to a papyrus sheet.

47. Witness, for example, the NT epistles of I Peter (possibly also II Peter), IITimothy, addressed from Rome to Ephesus or Asia Minor; Polycarps use of theepistle of Clement of Rome in his letter to the Philippians; his later visit to Romeunder Anicetus; the migration from Asia to Rome by Justin, Marcion, and (for a time)Irenaeus; the latters visits and correspondence with Rome after he had moved toGaul.

48. Hornschuh, Studien, 112.49. Which Hornschuh demonstrates, Studien, 11415.


3. C. D. G. Mller

We may treat more quickly the brief but more recent argumentsadduced in favor of an Egyptian provenance by Mller. He too brings thelong ending of Mark into play, arguing specifically for the Ep. Apost.sorigin in Lower Egypt because Marks Gospel was at that time stillunknown in parts of Upper Egypt.50 This may be, but this Gospel washardly unknown in a place like Asia Minor, which even knows the longending of Mark (Irenaeus, AH 3.10.6). In fact, Mller cites no corrobo-rating evidence for supposing that this ending was known in LowerEgypt in the second century. He claims that the bluntly antidocetictendency and the emphasis on the resurrection of the flesh are Egyp-tian.51 But this blunt tendency and emphasis could just as well, orprobably better, be Asian (cf. I, II John, Ignatius, Polycarp, ad Phil.). Healso cites the close association in the document between the Father andthe Son, the Father works through the Son as his incarnation andinstrument, and sees this as typical of Egypt, where the godheadworks not directly but through the ruler, who is its embodiment andinstrument.52 But this quality in Ep. Apost. may simply be an echo ofthe theology of the Fourth Gospel, so treasured by the author.

Mller does not deny connections with Asia Minor and elsewhere, butsees them explained if we suppose the author of Ep. Apost. to have been

a school head from the hellenistic-Jewish Christianity of Alexandria or itsneighbourhood, the point of irruption into Egypt for all oriental ideas andteachers. This also fits with the special mention of the additional apostlePaul, who played no role in Egyptian-Jewish Christianity and must here becommended for the first time. But possibly the author is in this wayanswering the regard in which the apostle was held among gentilegnostics.53

Yet it is not easy to see how an element considered foreign to anEgyptian milieu should be taken as evidence for an Egyptian milieu! Onthe other hand, the special recommendation of Paul would not be out ofplace in any document whose fictional setting is a revelation given onlyto the eleven in Palestine before the ascension of Jesus.

To summarize, many of the arguments which have been advanced forEgypt are plainly invalid, others are simply inconclusive and do not point

50. Mller, Epistula, 251.51. Mller, Epistula, 251.52. Here he is citing S. Morenz, Gott und Mensch im alten gypten (Leipzig,

1965), 74.53. Mller, Epistula, 251.


to Egypt any more surely than to Asia Minor, and others actually pointmore surely in the direction of Asia Minor itself.

4. J. J. Gunthers Objections

Beyond this, J. J. Gunther has noted two problems for an Egyptiancontext.54 Chapter 3 describes God as the one who . . . in the twinklingof an eye summons the rain for the wintertime, and fog, frost, andhail. . . . Gunther points out that the weather described in ch. 3 isinappropriate for Egypt.55 Gunther thinks it is compatible with Syria,but we may observe in passing that Cadoux gave the followingdescription of weather conditions in the environs of Smyrna: In andnear Smyrna, the winters are cold and stormy; but snow and frost areusually confined to the high ground. The annual rainfall, aboutthree-quarters of which comes during the months from November toMarch inclusive, averages nearly twenty-six inches; but it is veryvariable. . . . The later spring and the autumn are delightfully temper-ate.56

This point may be expanded by another notice in the Ep. Apost. ofapparently local weather conditions. In 34.9 the author speaks of thepossibility of drought from the failing of the rain. In Egypt, where thecrops were wholly dependent on irrigation57 provided by the floodingof the Nile, arid conditions were the rule and constant drought wouldhave been unexceptional.58 In Asia Minor it was quite different. As weshall see below, rain was quite necessary for each crop and droughts werenot uncommon. The weather conditions familiar to the author, then, allbut rule out an Egyptian setting for his writing.

Gunthers second argument against Egypt is that Clement andOrigen, in spite of their vast knowledge of apocrypha, showed no

54. More will appear from the results of our study below.55. Gunther, Syrian, 82.56. Cadoux, Ancient Smyrna, 19. There is also a description of the climate of the

Aegean coast in T. R. S. Broughton, Roman Asia, in T. Frank, ed., An EconomicSurvey of Ancient Rome, vol. IV: Africa, Syria, Greece, Asia Minor (Patterson, N.J.,1959), 499916, at 603.

57. A. C. Johnson, Roman Egypt to the Reign of Diocletian, in Frank, EconomicSurvey IV: 7.

58. Aelius Aristides hails the providence of Serapis, who, in a land where rain isleast likely, has brought in the Nile as a kind of imitator of himself and to be like rainfor the people (The Egyptian Discourse 123); again, the Nile comes itself in placeof the rain of Zeus and floods the land (Regarding Zeus 28). Translations ofAristides works are from from C. A. Behr, P. Aelius Aristides: The Complete Works,2 vols. (Leiden, 1981, 1986).


acquaintance with this Epistle.59 This argument from silence may havelittle independent weight but combined with the other observations thatwe are making can be allowed some confirmatory value. To be added tothis is the observation that the supposition of an Egyptian origin has ahard time accounting for the lack of reference in the document to thegreat Alexandrian heretic of the first half of the second century, Basilides,or to his peculiar doctrines.

Despite its current popularity, then, the case for Egypt is anything butstrong. Its weakness, I think, will be even more evident from whatfollows.

B. Syria

The arguments for Syria, though they have been developed lessextensively, are perhaps somewhat better.60 The list of attributes thisepistle shares with some early Syrian works includes the notion that atdeath one must escape the evil archons (apparently alluded to in ch. 28,cf. Act. Thom. 10, 143; possibly Odes Sol. 42.11). But this would not beconclusive, for such an idea is known outside Syria, in Egypt (Carpocrates,Irenaeus, AH 1.25.2) and in Rome or Asia Minor (Hippolytus, Comm.Dan. 3.31.23).61

In ch. 27 the Ep. Apost. assumes a baptism performed on the righteousin the underworld by Christ. This too is possibly signified in the SyrianOdes Sol. 42.20 (And I placed my name upon their head). But it is alsoknown outside Syria in the probably Palestinian Apoc. Pet. 14,62 theRoman Hermas Sim. 9.16.23, and is probably akin to the notionattested in Hippolytus and Origen that John the Baptist preached inHades as a forerunner to Christ before he descended there.63

1. J. J. Gunther

Gunther also accepts Delazers conclusions about Ep. Apost. presup-posing a heavenly liturgy, which is supposed to point to Syria. ButDelazers idea of a heavenly liturgy in ch. 13 has been criticized,64 and

59. Gunther, Syrian, 8283.60. In an earlier publication I made this assumption myself, following Gunther.61. Experts now disagree on the provenance of this author.62. R. J. Bauckham, The Two Fig Tree Parables in the Apocalypse of Peter, JBL

104 (1985): 26987. C. D. G. Mller, in NTA2, 2:622, though admitting the referenceto Bar Cochba in ch. 2, places the Apoc. Pet. instead in Egypt at about 135.

63. Hippolytus Antichr. 45; Origen, in Luc. Hom. 4; in Evang. Joh. 2.37.64. Duensing, Epistula, 191, Seidensticker in a review of the German edition

(Franzisk. Studien 1960, p. 91) contests the idea that in Ep. Apost. 13 (24) anything


some kind of heavenly liturgy is just as clearly presumed by Irenaeus(Dem. 9) and, indeed, by the book of Revelation (chs. 4, 5, etc.). Guntheris correct that there are points of contact with the Gospel of Peter, theDidascalia Apostolorum and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (ch. 4).65

But Irenaeus at least seems to know the portion of the Infancy Gospelwhich Ep. Apost. knows, and the other two documents may be later thanthe Ep. Apost.

2. J. de Zwaan

Gunthers case, so far as it goes, is not unreasonable, though it is veryfar from compelling. The parallels with Syrian literature he has cited arenot necessarily distinctive to Syrian literature. But now we must mentionJ. de Zwaans more specific attempt to show that the Epistula had anorigin about 195 in the native Syriac Church of Osrhone, the kingdomof Abgar.66 He thinks it is from this nationalist Syrian church, asopposed to that of the so-called Palutians, the orthodox intruders intothe area, that the document emanated. But H. J. W. Drijvers thinks thisnationalist church was probably Marcionite,67 and the Ep. Apost. isanything but Marcionite! Whether it came from the unorthodox statechurch or from the orthodox Palutians, we would surely expect froman east Syrian document at this time more strident indications of thepresence of Marcionism. As Drijvers says, Polemic with Marcion is . . .a distinguishing mark of all Syrian theology in its different forms fromthe very beginning of Syriac literature forward.68 But the absence of anyindication of Marcionism in the Ep. Apost. has been noted by Guntherhimself.69 The last thing to be said about De Zwaans arguments is thatthey center mainly on the documents Quartodecimanism and leave mostof the rest of its contents untouched. Yet it must be said that, though

is said of a divine service in heaven. The passage cannot be understood as theprojection of Christian practice into heaven.

65. Gunther, Syrian, 83.66. de Zwaan, Date and Origin, 344.67. H. J. W. Drijvers, Christ as Warrior and Merchant. Aspects of Marcions

Christology, Studia Patristica 21 (1989): 7385 at 75, [Marcionism] was probablya form of a Christianity that was first known in large areas in Syria, so that the nameChristian was monopolized by the Marcionites. Ephrem complains bitterly that theorthodox were called Palutians after a certain Palut, since the name Christians was inuse among another group, most likely the Marcionites; idem, Marcionism in Syria:Principles, Problems, Polemics, SCe 6 (198788): 15372 at 17273.

68. Drijvers, Facts and Problems in Early Syriac-Speaking Christianity, SCe 2(1982): 15775 at 174.

69. Gunther, Syrian, 91.


there is a definite polemical thrust to the epistle, Quartodecimanism doesnot figure at all prominently in it.70 The present but unobtrusive signs ofQuartodeciman practice do not at all appear to be a protest againstconformity to the Roman pattern;71 in fact, they surely seem to indicatethat the Quartodeciman controversy of the 190s is not yet on thehorizon.

Finally, in assessing the claims of Syria (East or West), one needs to askwhether the Epistula displays to any noticeable extent many of thecharacteristic traits of Syrian Christianity. Drijvers describes the Chris-tology of early Syrian literary sources: In all that literature Christ isconsidered Gods eternal thought and will, incarnate in a human body inorder that man might return to the original state in which he was createdaccording to Gods thought and will. Christ manifests the divine will byhis obedience unto death, which means by dominating human passionsand human strivings, revealing in this way Gods eternal thoughtconcerning the salvation of mankind.72 The ascetic and perhaps evensomewhat docetic tendencies to which such a theology opens itself arenot in evidence in the Ep. Apost. Also, though the Ep. Apost. knows theapostle Thomas (ch. 2), it does not give him his characteristic Syrianname of Judas Thomas, or Didymus Judas Thomas, a phenomenoncharacteristic of and restricted to early Syriac literature.73

De Zwaans view that our document is the product of EdesseneChristianity of about 195 is simply untenable. If it is Syrian it would haveto be much earlier, as Gunther suggests, before the wave of Marcionismfrom Rome swept across Syria and the eastern Mediterranean.74 So far,though there may be little to disqualify Syria of the first half of the secondcentury, there is also little that specifically commends it.

70. Hardly signifying that the Paschal controversy was red-hot, pace de Zwaan,Date and Origin, 348.

71. de Zwaan, Date and Origin, 354. S. G. Hall, Melito of Sardis: On Paschaand Fragments, OECT (Oxford, 1979), xxv, thinks its Quartodecimanism is by nomeans certain.

72. Hellenistic and Oriental Origins, in S. Hackel, ed., The Byzantine Saint:University of Birmingham Fourteenth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies.Studies Supplementary to Sobornost 5 (London, 1981), 2533 at 32.

73. H. J. W. Drijvers, Facts and Problems, 15859. He notes its presence in theVetus Syra, in the Acts of Thomas, in Ephrem Syrus, in the Doctrina Addai and inEusebius, Church History I. 13 where the bishop of Caesarea gives a Greektranslation of essential parts of the Abgar correspondence and Abgar legend (159).Drijvers description (17071) of the theology of the Thomas literature would surelyexclude the Ep. Apost. from this category.

74. Gunther, Syrian, 91.


C. Asia

1. Schmidts Arguments

Schmidts arguments for Asia Minor have not so much been refuted asdeemed inconclusive. Hornschuh treated them in the process of rejectingthem, and we shall find it convenient to cite them here as he does.

1) The mention of Cerinthus with Simon. Cerinthus is, of course,placed in Asia by Irenaeus, our earliest source (besides the Ep. Apost.).Hornschuh cannot accept this as valid, however, because of the wayCerinthus is used here. Cerinthus and Simon are thought to be intro-duced as mere types, not as those whose teaching is really affecting thecommunity.75 Moreover, they are presented as heretics from the apostolicage, whose false teaching has gone throughout the world (7.1). IfCerinthus teaching is thus widespread, his reputation cannot be limitedto Asia. Simons Samaritan origin does not mean the Epistula isSamaritan, so neither does Cerinthus Asian origin mean it is Asian.Strictly speaking, this is correct. I would argue, however, that theinclusion of Simon is understandable on the supposition that he wasconsidered the fount of all Christian heresies (AH 1.23.2; 2.praef.1, etc.),and his is one of the few heretical names which could be associated withthe times of the apostles, the putative senders of the epistle. Cerinthus,on the other hand, though he could also be said to be an apostolicheretic, because associated with the apostle John, flourished much later,according to Asian tradition (AH 3.3.4; 11.1), and this must put himmuch closer to the authors own time. I would even argue that it ispossible to show that Ep. Apost.s knowledge of Cerinthus extends to theheretics teaching. But the systematic demonstration of this is really thework of another study. In the remainder of the present study, Cerinthusand his teaching will be used only illustratively.

2) The authors predilection for the Fourth Gospel. Hornschuh cannotargue with Schmidts conclusion that in keiner der uns berliefertenSchriften (sc. des 2. Jahrhunderts) eine derartig starke Benutzung des

75. For this Hornschuh has the support even of Schmidt, whom he quotes (99) assaying, vielmehr sind diese beiden Namen nur Typen der Gesamterscheinung . . .Sollte nmlich die Fiktion aufrechterhalten werden, da die Apostel selbst alsoBekmpfer der gnostischen Hresie auftreten, so mute der Verfasser Hretiker derapostolischen Zeit namhaft machen (from Schmidt, Gesprche, 195). He can alsoclaim Bardys support (Bardy, 118), Dans la lettre des Aptres, Simon et Crinthparaissent plutt comme des types, dj lgendaires, que comme des personnagesvivants.


Johannesevangeliums hervortritt wie in der vorliegenden.76 But thisonly carries weight for Asia Minor, Hornschuh rightly observes, if oneaccepts the ecclesiastical tradition that the Fourth Gospel was writtenthere. Fr den, der der kirchlichen Tradition nicht folgen kann, bleibtdas Argument wertlos.77 Hornschuh elsewhere (as we have seen)mentions the evidence that the Fourth Gospel was recognized quite earlyin Egypt as well. It should probably be admitted that whatever prov-enance is thought most likely for the Fourth Gospel will have to beseriously considered as a probable place of origin of a work such as theEp. Apost. as well. But this is by no means conclusive.

3) The special place of John in the apostle-list in ch. 2. Unlike anyother apostle-list up to this time, the one given in Ep. Apost. 2 has Johnin first place. This goes along with the authors penchant for the FourthGospel, and is fairly taken to indicate his understanding of the author-ship of that Gospel. But this verdict is subject to the same objection asthe previous one. Hornschuh points out that the Apocryphon of Johnfrom Nag Hammadi also has a special role for John, and nobodyattributes this work to Asia.78

4) The Quartodeciman Easter (Passover) assumed by Ep. Apost. 15(26). Hornschuh admits that the Ep. Apost. is an early witness toQuartodecimanism. But he theorizes that a Palestinian group would takethis practice wherever they migrated, and in Hornschuhs view, in thecase of our author and his community, this was Egypt.79 All we can saythen from the Quartodecimanism of the author is that it certainly fitswell with Asia, but does not point infallibly to that region.

It should be quite evident that the weight of much of this evidencedepends upon ones prior judgment about the origin of the FourthGospel, though it should be said at this point that the Johannineconnections do not stop with the Fourth Gospel. Wherever Ep. Apost.was produced, II or III John was probably known,80 and the Apocalypse

76. Hornschuh, Studien, 100, citing Schmidt, 224f.77. Hornschuh, Studien, 100.78. Hornschuh, Studien, 100.79. Hornschuh, Studien, 100101. R. M. Grant, Jewish Christianity at Antioch in

the Second Century, in J. Moingt, ed., Judo-Christianisme: Recherches historiqueset thologiques offertes en hommage au Cardinal Jean Danilou (Paris, 1972), 97108, at 107, supposes, based on Eusebius silence with regard to any Antiochenebishop as attending a synod to support the Roman side of the controversy, thatQuartodeciman practice endured in Antioch till this time. But this is merely aninference.

80. Ch. 38, the phrase walk in truth is probably borrowed from II Jn 4; III Jn34.


of John was popular too. And here I must disagree with Hornschuh, whoclaims there are no points of contact with the book of Revelation.81 TheNTA2 lists nine probable references or allusions to Revelation and as thisstudy proceeds we shall see that there are more. The weight of thecombination, then, of the authors familiarity with the Fourth Gospeland with the Apocalypse (which is universally acknowledged as Asian, asit addresses seven churches there), and his communitys Quartodecimanpractice should probably be allowed to fall on the side of Asia Minor.Nonetheless, this evidence will be weakened for those who hold out fora different birthplace for the Fourth Gospel. As stated above, I believethe author can be shown to be familiar with the teachings of Cerinthus.This also should point strongly to Asia, though there are those whobelieve Hippolytus notice that Cerinthus was trained in Egypt signifiesan alternative and superior tradition that this man came from Egypt.82

For the purposes of our investigation I prefer not to rely on thedisputed implications of Schmidts evidence in arguing for the prov-enance of the Ep. Apost. We shall instead leave all the weight whichmight accumulate from an Asian origin of the Fourth Gospel and anAsian provenance of the Cerinthus traditions to one side. There is, Ibelieve, much more evidence which can be appealed to which will pointin the same direction.

We have already noted a few instances above where argumentsintended to support other localities turned out to make their bestcontributions to Asia, namely, the weather patterns mentioned in ch. 3;the apparent knowledge of the longer ending of Marks Gospel; theChristological reading of Jn 1.13. In what follows we shall arrangevarious pieces of evidence, under aspects of literary or theologicalaffinities, indicators of the social situation, and external historicalfactors, all of which can be integrated into the search for the origins ofthe Ep. Apost. and all of which, I believe, lead us in the direction of AsiaMinor.

2. Literary and Theological Affinities

a. Asian Biblical Texts and Exegesis

The first argument comes from what we might call Asian texts andexegesis. We have already alluded to Ep. Apost. 30.1, which probably

81. Hornschuh, Studien, 102.82. B. G. Wright III, Cerinthus Apud Hippolytus: An Inquiry into the Traditions

about Cerinthuss Provenance, SCe 4 (1984): 10315.


correctly has been said to reflect knowledge of the long ending of MarksGospel. We have noted that this ending is first clearly signified in a writerof Asian extraction, Irenaeus (AH 3.10.6), and possibly is attested by anearlier Asian, Papias of Hierapolis (Eusebius, HE 3.39.9). We have alsomet with another textual peculiarity which is attested early in Asia,namely, the application of Jn 1.13 to Jesus, who was born not by thelust of the flesh but by the will of God (3.2). As with Justin, so here, wecannot know for certain whether this represents a variant text at thispoint,83 or whether it is simply a christological application of the verse.But by the time Irenaeus uses it, it was apparently a textual reading in hiscopy of Johns Gospel.84 The point here is that outside its use in Ep.Apost. it is known in the second century only in one who spent his earlyChristian life in Ephesus (and probably acquired his first copy of theFourth Gospel there), in the Asian Irenaeus (AH 3.16.2; 19.2; 21.5, 7;5.1.3), and then in one who was a student of Irenaeus writings,Tertullian (De carne Christi 19.1; 24.2; cf. 15.3). Both these latter use itin defense of the virgin birth of Jesus not involving a human father,against heretics such as the Ebionites (or the Cerinthians) who taughtotherwise. We also observed that this reading is unknown to Clementand apparently Origen, and is found in no Alexandrian text of theFourth Gospel.

Next is the christological application of the OT appellation of God asthe one, who is over the Cherubim (Ps 80.1 or 99.1) which appears inthe list of attributes of Jesus in Ep. Apost. 3.1.85 This expression asapplied to Jesus is attested elsewhere in the second century only inIrenaeus: AH 3.11.8, the Word, the Artificer of all, He that sitteth uponthe cherubim, and contains all things. . . . As also David says, when

83. All the surviving Greek MSS of John contain the plural, o . . . gennfiyhsan, andnot the singular, w . . . gennfiyh. There is but one witness for the singular in the OldLatin (MSS b). See Ehrman, Orthodox Corruption, 27, 59.

84. Apparently Irenaeus was not aware that there was a variation in the textualtradition, though Tertullian was (De carne christi 19.1). The latter blamed the pluralreading (today accepted as the original) on the Valentinians. Thus, Tertullianevidently had access to both readings, though no Greek MSS containing the singularhas survived. It is significant that this alteration of the text (if it was an alteration andnot simply a Christological application of it) is assumed in a document which opposesCerinthus, who, like the Ebionites mentioned by both Irenaeus and Tertullian, taughtan adoption of the earthly Jesus at the time of his baptism. In my opinion, this is thelikeliest context for the original variation.

85. Dieser Jesus Christus ist an die Stelle des alttestamentlichen Gottes gesetzt unddeshalb wird auch der solenne Titel desselben ihm an erster Stelle erteilt, Schmidt,Gesprche, 268. See also Hills, Tradition, 5455.


entreating His manifestation, Thou that sittest between the cherubim,shine forth (Ps 80.1);86 4.33.13, And those who said, The LORDhath reigned; let the people be enraged: [even] He who sitteth upon thecherubim; let the earth be moved (Ps 99.1), were thus predicting . . . thefact that, when He comes from heaven with His mighty angels, the wholeearth shall be shaken. . . .87 The same understanding of these texts asreferring to Jesus is signified in the title given to him by Irenaeuscontemporary and fellow-Asian, Melito of Sardis, who calls him chari-oteer of the Cherubim (Fragm. 15, l. 66; New Fragm. II, l. 200).88

Ep. Apost. 27 takes up a Pauline metaphor from Phil 2.16, so that inthe day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor invain.89 After announcing that pardon has been extended to the deceasedOT patriarchs and prophets in Hades, just as to the disciples, and sofrom now on also to those who believe in me, Ep. Apost. 27 (Eth.)continues, But whoever believes in me and does not do my command-ment receives, although he believes in my name, no benefit from it. Hehas run a course in vain. His end is determined for ruin and forpunishment of great pain, for he has sinned against my commandment.The only other recorded allusion to Phil 2.16 in the second century is inPolycarps letter to the Philippians, and both sources use it in the samedistinctive way. Polycarp, Phil. 9. 2, after holding before the Philippiansthe examples of faithful apostles and martyrs who are presumed to havedied, says, being persuaded that all of these ran not in vain, but infaith and righteousness, and that they are with the Lord in the placewhich is their due,90 with whom they also suffered. Polycarp speaks ofthe afterlife blessings of those who have not run their lifes course invain;91 our anonymous author speaks instead of the afterlife woes ofthose who have.

86. This is related in the context to the four living creatures from Ezek 1; Rev 4,described as cherubim in Ezek 10, and is there part of Irenaeus defense of thefour-fold Gospel.

87. Irenaeus goes on to relate this to the eschatological earthquake predicted in Mt24.21. These verses may have had a special significance in the Asia Minor of Irenaeusyouth. See below.

88. Hall, Melito, 84, 93.89. The phrase run in vain is used by Paul in another context in Gal 2.2, lest

somehow I should be running or had run in vain. The metaphor of life as a raceoccurs again in II Tim 4.7, I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, Ihave kept the faith.

90. Cf. I Clem. 5.4.91. See Clement of Alexandrias beautiful extended metaphor in Quis Dives

Salvetur 3, who, however, does not mention running in vain.


b. Extracanonical Traditions

Often it is said that the Ep. Apost. shares some concepts withgnosticism, or at least with some forms of nonstandard Christianity.And one of the elements that probably gives rise to this is the notion,seen also in the Ascension of Isaiah 10.7ff., of Jesus disguising himself inhis descent from the highest heaven to enter the womb of the virgin (ch.13). As it is in the Ethiopic,

While I was coming from the Father of all, passing by the heavens, whereinI put on the wisdom of the Father and by his power clothed myself in hispower, I was like the heavens. And passing by the angels and archangels intheir form and as one of them, I passed by the orders, dominions, andprinces, possessing the measure of the wisdom of the Father who sent me.And the archangels Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Uriel followed meuntil the fifth firmament of heaven, while I appeared as one of them. Thiskind of power was given me by the Father. Then I made the archangels tobecome distracted with the voice and go up to the altar of the Father andserve the Father in their work until I should return to him.

In spite of the absence of a drama of this kind from the canonical NTwritings, we find that no less a representative of second-century ortho-doxy than Irenaeus knows and accepts some such speculation aboutChrists descent.

But the earth is encompassed by seven heavens, in which dwell Powers andAngels and Archangels, giving homage to the Almighty God who created allthings. . . .92 Hence the first heaven from the top, which encloses the others,is wisdom. . . . (Dem. 9)

Again David says this very thing: Take up your gates, O ye princes, and belifted up, O eternal gates; and the king of glory shall enter in (Ps 24.7); forthe eternal gates are the heavens. But because the Word came downinvisible to creatures, He was not known to them in His Descent; since theWord had become incarnate, He was also visible, in His ascension; andwhen the principalities saw Him, the angels underneath called to those whowere on the firmament: Take up your gates. . . . (Dem. 84)

The acceptance of this story of Christs disguising himself so as toavoid recognition by the strata of angels in his incarnational descent thenwas not necessarily restricted to fringe Christian groups, and Irenaeusshows that it may well have been known to him from his early life inAsia.

92. Each heaven is said to correspond to one of the seven charismata of the Spiritaccording to Isa 11.2f. In Jewish or Jewish-Christian sources, see Test. Levi 3; Asc.Isa. 10; Secrets of Enoch 3f.


On the other hand, the author of Ep. Apost. and Irenaeus show asharp disagreement about another extracanonical tradition, the story ofthe boy Jesus and his teachers, a version of which is also known from theInfancy Gospel of Thomas. The author of Ep. Apost. tells his version ofthe story with no qualms (ch. 4), while Irenaeus pronounces severelyagainst it and attributes it to unacceptable sources (AH 1.20.1).93 Whatwe must observe here, however, is simply that both know the story. Itwould be reasonable to suppose that Irenaeus represents a later, morecritical view towards this tradition, a tradition which he may haveknown from his Asian upbringing.

These two extracanonical traditions about Jesus then are significantelements shared by Ep. Apost. and Irenaeus which may denote access toa common fund of Asian tradition. Combined with the knowledge ofcommon forms of NT textual variations and interpretations, we arebeginning to see the accumulation of substantial links between Ep.Apost. and Asian Christianity.

c. Adding to and Subtracting from

In ch. 29 the author invokes a concept of adding to or subtractingfrom which also has strong links with second-century Asia Minor.

Ethiopic

But those who have sinned againstmy commandment, who teachsomething else, subtract from andadd to and work for their ownglory, alienating those who rightlybelieve in me (MS S adds: I willdeliver them into ruin).

93. The Ep. Apost.s use of this story does not at all, however, necessarily signal anunorthodox or docetic Christology. Epiphanius tell us in fact why the orthodox mightbe interested in such traditions about the childhood of Jesus: For he ought to havechildhood miracles too, to deprive the other sects of an excuse for saying that Christ, meaning the dove, came to him after [his baptism in] the Jordan. They say thisbecause of the sum of the letters alpha and omega, which is [the same as the sum ofthe letters of] dove, since the Savior said, I am Alpha and I am Omega (Panar.51.20.3). That is, such stories offered a way of confirming the orthodox Christologyof the union of the divine and human natures of Jesus Christ before the baptism in theJordan. This would make sense in a work such as Ep. Apost., written explicitly tocounteract the influences of Cerinthus. Irenaeus will restrict himself to canonical,Scriptural traditions, but, interestingly, he uses Lukes account of the blessing ofSimeon (Lk 2.29) to show the same thing, that Jesus was Christ from his birth, againstadoptionist Christologies which divide him up (AH 3.16.4).

Coptic

But those who have transgressed(my) commandments and havetaught another teaching, (in thatthey dissolve) the written (teaching)and add . . . their own, teachingwith other words (those whobelieve) in me rightly, if they arebrought to ruin by such things (theywill receive) eternal punishment.


Beginning with its use by the author of Rev 22.1819, this rule of notadding to or subtracting from comes to be used in battling corruption ofthe tradition and false teaching, with special application to the falsificationof Scripture (or in the case of Polycrates, falsifying the Quartodecimanpaschal practice inherited from the Apostles).94

Revelation, ca. 95

n tiw piy p at . . . ka n tiw fl p tn lgvn to biblou twprofhteaw tathw. (Rev 22.1819)

Irenaeus, 17590

neque additamentum neque ablationem recipiens (pertaining to the hereticalforging or falsifying of Scripture). (AH 4.33.8)

peita d to prosyntow felntow ti tw grafw (of those who haveseized upon the number 616 instead of 666 for the Antichrist). (AH 5.30.1)

The anonymous antimontanist cited by Eusebius, 19293

mfite prosyenai mfite felen (of the Montanists who added to and tookaway from the word of the new covenant of the gospel). (HE 5.16.3)

Polycrates, 19095

tfln mran mfite prostiyntew mfite fairomenoi (speaking of the 14th ofNisan). (Euseb. HE 5.24.2)

Tertullian, 198201

detractione, vel adiectione vel transmutatione (of those like Valentinus andMarcion, who corrupt Scripture). (De praescr. heret. 38)

Si non est scriptum, timeat Vae illud adicientibus aut detrahentibusdestinatum (concerning Hermogenes, who falls under this curse for adding adoctrine of the eternity of matter). (Adv. Hermog. 22)

94. The phrase occurs in the Two-Ways tradition in the Didache 4.1, repeated inBarn. 19.2, 11, but its use in these works is to emphasize the completeness ofobedience to the Lords commandments, and remonte directement au Deutronome(W. C. Van Unnik, De la rgle Mfite prosyenai mfite felen dans lhistoire ducanon, VC 3 [1949]: 136, at 35), that is to Dt 12.32 (13.1 Heb; LXX): Pn =ma, g ntllomai soi sfimeron, toto fulj poien: o prosyfiseiw p at odfelew p uto. cf. 4.2 o prosyfisete prw t =ma g ntllomai mn, ka okfelete p ato: fulssesye tw ntolw kurou to yeo mn. The Didache isprobably the source of the saying in the fourth-century Ecclesiastical Canons of theHoly Apostles 14, 30 (see Quasten, Patrology 2: 11920).


Van Unnik points out that all the authors who use the warning in thisway in this period have some close connection with Asia Minor: Tousces textes datent de la mme poque (6170200),95 en partie du mmemilieu (lAsie Mineure avec laquelle Tertullien parat avoir t enrelation).96 As to the Ep. Apost. itself, the Coptic translation of Ep.Apost. 29.1 clarifies that the commandments of Jesus in view areassociated with a written text or texts. The malediction in Ep. Apost.thus aligns itself with these other authors and reveals both a concern anda customary response which must have been fairly widespread in AsiaMinor in the second century. The phrase seems to be operating as awell-known, general rule.

d. Perversion of the Lords Sayings

The sentiment voiced in the passage just cited from Ep. Apost. 29.1 isechoed elsewhere in the document (chs. 7.2; 50.8), where it is againlamented that some are not keeping Jesus commandments and aresomehow perverting his words. This in turn shows up a parallel withPolycarp of Smyrna, who in his section on false teachers indicts thosewho pervert the Lords lgia (7.1).

Polycarp, Ad Phil. 7.1

. . . and whoso perverts (meyode)the oracles of the Lord (t lgia tokurou) for his own lusts(piyumaw), and says that there isneither resurrection nor judgmentthis man is the firstborn of Satan.

Papias, in HE 3.39.16

. . . and about Matthew this wassaid, Matthew composed the

95. Van Unnik does not have Rev 22.1819 in view at this point, which, of course,shows the familiarity of this rule in Asia Minor from a much earlier time.

96. Van Unnik, De la rgle, 9. Cf. a striking example from a pagan writer,Artemidorus, in his Oneirocriticon 2.70 (which Van Unnik dates to ca. 130, thoughother sources place it later in the second century) who uses it in regards to his ownwritings, and invokes the wrath of Apollo for violation. It is of interest to note thatArtemidorus was an Ephesian! See Van Unnik, De la rgle, 25, for text. R. H.Charles, The Revelation of St. John, 2 vols., ICC (Edinburgh, 1920), 2: 223, citessomething similar from I Enoch 104.10, And now I know this mystery, that sinnerswill alter and pervert the words of righteousness in many ways, and will speak wickedwords, and so they should not change or minish aught from my words, 104.11.See Van Unnik for other examples.

Ep. Apost. 7

Cerinthus and Simon have come togo through the world. But they arethe enemies of our Lord JesusChrist, (E) who in reality alienatethose who believe in the true wordand deed, namely Jesus Christ[Copt.: for they pervert the wordsand the object, which is JesusChrist]. Therefore take care andbeware of them, for in them is


oracles (t lgia) in the Hebrewlanguage, and each interpreted themas best he could.

Irenaeus, AH 1.praef.

These men falsify the oracles of theLord (=&diourgontew t lgia toKurou), and prove themselves evilinterpreters of things well expressed.

Polycarp and Papias (whose book was called Logvn kuriaknjhgfisevw [or zfighsiw or zhgfiseiw], Eusebius, HE 3.39.1)97 togetherwitness to the interest in the lgia to kurou in Asia Minor of the firsthalf of the second century98 and the Asian emigr Irenaeus perpetuatesthis concern in the second half.99 And we can see that the parallelbetween Ep. Apost. and Polycarp, in particular, extends further. For theperversion of the Lords words which Polycarp has in view in Phil. 7.1concerns a denial of resurrection and judgment (presumably in Polycarpsview to indulge the flesh without fear of retribution).100 And a denial ofthe doctrine of a resurrection of the body, with the soul, is clearly one ofthe key problems which Ep. Apost. is trying hard to correct (e.g., chs. 21,

97. See H. J. Lawlor, Eusebius on Papias, Hermathena 19 (1922): 167222 at167.

98. Lawlor, Papias, 192, in the second century t lgia would usually meanthe written Scriptures, including narrative as well as divine or divinely inspiredsayings. Though Lawlors conclusion here is seldom represented today, it still seemsto me to be the most well-founded. For the view that the lgia which Papias sayswere written down by Matthew (HE 3.39.16) may represent the alleged SynopticSayings Source Q, see Koester, Introduction, 172.

99. See also the words of Paul in his letter to the Corinthians in Acta Pauli 8.3,3, the Lord Jesus Christ . . . is rejected by those who falsify his words. This is saidwith reference to docetists of some kind.

100. See J. B. Lightfoot, Essays on the Work Entitled Supernatural Religion(London/New York, 1893), 11920; P. N. Harrison, Polycarps Two Epistles to thePhilippians (Cambridge, 1936), 2775.

affliction and contamination anddeath, the end of which will bedestruction and judgment [Copt.: fordeath is in them and a great stain ofcorruptionthese to whom shall bejudgment and the end and eternalperdition].

Ibid. 50 (Eth. only)

But woe to those who use my wordand my commandment for a pretext,and also to those who listen to themand to those who turn away fromthe life of the teaching, to those whoturn away from the commandmentof life (this last clause not in ParisNos. 51, 90, and 199), they will beeternally punished with them.


22, 24, 25, 26).101 The author of Ep. Apost. in ch. 50 threatens eternalretribution against those who use Christs word and commandment for apretext, and against those who follow their teaching. And in ch. 7 similarwords are used of the false apostles Simon and Cerinthus, the similaritybeing especially marked in the Coptic version cited above (for theypervert the words and the object, which is Jesus Christ). The Ep.Apost.s concern about taking from or adding to (29.1) is of a piecewith its concern about using Christs word as a pretext, known to be aconcern in early second-century Asia through the writings of Polycarp,Papias, and Irenaeus.

Though we have put off to another place the detailed consideration ofthe traditions concerning Cerinthus, his name comes up unavoidablyhere. The doctrinal problem in view in Polycarp, Phil. 7.1 and Ep.Apost., the denial of bodily resurrection, particularly if this was con-nected with a denial of retribution for deeds done in the body (thelusts in Polycarp, Phil. 7.1 taken in a carnal sense), would beappropriate to what we know about Cerinthus, at least as he wasunderstood by the critics of his legacy. In fact, as I hope to show inanother place, the errors combatted in our apocryphon coalesce morecompletely with those of Cerinthus than with any other known teacheror group. At any rate, Cerinthus is specifically named by our author. It issignificant that besides the author of the Ep. Apost., Irenaeus is the onlywriter whose extant works seem to show a considerable knowledgeabout Cerinthus.102 And we know that at least some of his informationon this heretic came from his prominent Asian mentor, Polycarp ofSmyrna (AH 3.3.4).

3. Social Setting

Another line of new evidence to which I would like to call attentionhas to do with social factors pertaining to the Christian communitydiscernible in the Ep. Apost. Most of the points of comparison comefrom the situation of the church in Polycarps Smyrna in the first decadesof the second century.

101. Schmidt, Gesprche, 126; Hornschuh, Studien, 64.102. The mention of Cerinthus by Gaius of Rome and later by Dionysius of

Alexandria (Euseb. HE 3.28.2; 7.25.13) focus on a single aspect of his teaching, hisalleged chiliasm.


a. Confrontation with the Vain Teaching of False Christians

Pol. Ad Phil. 2.1

. . . putting aside empty vanity (tflnkenfln) and vulgar error. . . .

Ibid. 6.3

Let us be zealous for good,refraining from offense, and fromfalse brethren, and from those whobear the name of the Lord inhypocrisy, who deceiveempty-minded men (poplansikenow nyrpouw).

It is true that almost any false teaching could be denounced as vain,almost any false teachers could be impugned as deceiving and brandedfalse brethren or false apostles. But the similar ways in which theseauthors chose to characterize a particular false teaching and the falseteachers which were troubling their communities begin to reveal com-mon patterns. The connection of these patterns to Asian Christianity,even specifically to Smyrna, is strengthened by observing further parallelsbetween these two authors and the book of Revelation, as follows.

b. Love of Money and Respect of Persons

Rev 2.9 (to the church at Smyrna)

I know your tribulation and yourpoverty (but you are rich). . . . Donot fear what you are about tosuffer.

Polycarp, Ad Phil. 2.2

. . . if we do his will, and walk inhis commandments . . . refrainingfrom all unrighteousness,covetousness, love of money(filarguraw), evil speaking, falsewitness. . . . 2.3 but rememberingwhat the Lord taught when hesaid . . . Blessed are the poor, andthey who are persecuted forrighteousness sake (Mt 5.3, 10)

Ep. Apost. 37.4

Among them there are some whobelieve in my name and (yet) followevil and teach vain teaching.

Ibid. 1.1

. . . which was written because ofthe false apostles Simon andCerinthus, that no one should followthemfor in them is deceit withwhich they kill men. . . .

Ep. Apost. 37.5

And men will follow them and willsubmit themselves to their riches,their depravity, their mania fordrinking, and their gifts of bribery;and respect of persons will ruleamong them.

Ibid. 38. 13

But those who desire to see the faceof God and who do not regard theperson of the sinful rich and who donot fear the men who lead themastray, but reprove them, they willbe crowned in the presence of theFather. . . . But those who walk intruth . . . (E) and have . . .


Ibid. 4.1

But the beginning of all evils is thelove of money (filargura).Knowing therefore that we broughtnothing into the world and we cantake nothing out of it. . . . 4.3teach the widows . . . being far fromall slander, evil speaking, falsewitness, love of money(filarguraw), and all evil. . . .

Ibid. 6.1

refraining from all wrath, respect ofpersons, unjust judgment, being farfrom all love of money(filarguraw). . . .

Ibid. 11.1

I advise, therefore, that you keepfrom avarice (avaritia), and be pureand truthful. . . . 11.2 If any mandoes not abstain from avarice(avaritia) he will be defiled byidolatry. . . .

The depressed financial condition of the church at Smyrna, despite theprosperity of the city as a whole, must have been well-known, beingattested already in Rev 2.9.103 It seems to be confirmed by the abundanceof references in Polycarps letter to the dangers of filargura. Thesereferences may be due part to the situation in Philippi which Polycarp isaddressing, in which the presbyter Valens has been recently deposed forsome indulgence of avarice. But the references to avarice occur through-out the epistle, not just where that disciplinary problem is addressed, andtheir prominence in his epistle, combined with the reference in Rev 2.9,strongly suggest that issues of poverty and riches were live ones inSmyrna. This is further confirmed by a look at Ignatius correspondencewith Smyrna. Ignatius counsels Polycarp not to encourage manumissionsof slaves from the churchs common chest (Polyc. 4.3). Harrill suggeststhis is because of competition for members among house churches.Without unity and episcopal control over the common chest, only rich

103. See C. Hemer, The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in their LocalSetting, JSNT Suppl. Ser. 11 (Sheffield, 1986), 68, for probable causes for this poverty.

perseverance for righteousness sake(Mt 5.10), in that men despise thosewho strive for poverty and they(nevertheless) enduregreat is theirreward (cf. Mt 5.12). Those who arereviled, tormented, persecuted, sincethey are destitute and men arearrogant against them and theyhunger and thirst (Mt 5.6) andbecause they have perseveredblessed will they be in heaven.

Ibid. 46.1

. . . respecting and fearing theperson of no one, but especially(not) that of the rich . . . that theydo not do my commandments, whorevel in their riches.


(or worse, heretical) house churches could have afforded to buymembers through corporate manumission.104 Slaves, likewise, mustdisplay fidelity to the bishops house church and not be lured away bycash offers of liberation by other unauthorized (and to Ignatiuss mind,heretical) house churches.105

Surely many other Christian churches in the empire struggled withpoverty. But not only were the Smyrnaean church and the communitybehind the Ep. Apost. beset with similar pecuniary circumstances, intheir distresses both derived great comfort from the promises of Mt 5.3,6, 1012, as their citations of or allusions to these dominical wordsshow. And besides warnings against the love of money, Polycarps list ofadmonitions includes the forbidding of respect of persons (6.1), whichhappens to be another prominent social concern of the author of the Ep.Apost. (37.5; 46.1).106

The problems of economic and social stratification appear similar,then, in the Smyrnaean documents and in the Ep. Apost. Ep. Apost. goesbeyond Polycarp, however, in openly censuring his communitys majorrivals as those who are sinful rich, depraved, given to drink, andrespecters of person.107 These all combine to form a vivid picture of acommunitys struggles,108 made more realistic by a comparison of the

104. J. Albert Harrill, Ignatius, Ad Polycarp. 4.3 and the Corporate Manumissionof Christian Slaves, JECS 1 (1993): 10742 at 136.

105. Harrill, Ignatius, 137.106. Cf. Ignatius counsel to the Smyrnaeans (Smyrn. 6.2) about some who have no

care for love, none for the widow, none for the orphan, none for the distressed, nonefor the afflicted, none for the prisoner, or for him released from prison, none for thehungry or thirsty.

107. Hills, Tradition, 140, citing the occurrence of the motifs of (a) the discipleswarning or reproof; (b) the absence of fear; (c) the absence of partiality; (d) theignoring of others riches; and (e) the keeping of the commandments in chs. 24; 37;38; 46; 47, says, The fivefold occurrence of this group of ideas puts it beyond doubtthat there is a communal reality in the authors mind. The question arises whether thisis merely an ideal or perceived reality or an actual one . . . (141). Afteracknowledging the typical nature of the characterizations of the opponents (141),he later conjectures, that the strong we/they dichotomy reflects a real situation ofcompeting Christian groups. The community of the Epistula has made its appeal tothe rival group, who are possibly in the majority. Of those warned at least some haveturned back (145). Hornschuh, Studien, 96, points out that in a work addressed tothe orthodox against Gnosis we might expect a reference to episcopal authority, butwe have no recourse to this in the Ep. Apost. He says in fact that da das Amt in dieHnde der Gnostiker gefallen war. He speaks of a Brderethik of brotherly love inthe epistle, like that of a minority sect or conventicle, an ecclesiola in ecclesia (97).

108. On the persecution and martyrdom endured by the Ep. Apost.s community,see Hills, Tradition, 11115, who refers to chs. 15, 36, 38, 50.


Smyrnaean materials of Ignatius and Polycarp. It is not difficult tovisualize a situation in which reciprocation in ecclesiastical matters waspurchased through monetary means (or where such attempts weremade), and in which the temptation existed to cater to the desires ofthose who had financial and social position, but not the right moral orecclesiastical credentials. Again, Harrill speaks of the sticky problemswhich may have been caused by the coexistence of those of widelydisparate means in the same churches:

Paramone obligations directly to house congregations would haveestablished a hierarchy of patronage independent of any monarchicalbishop who claimed authority over the whole metropolitan area. Thisindependence would have fueled the potential for a power struggle betweenIgnatian clergy and wealthy house church patrons over which groupcontrolled congregational church funds. Indeed, the clergy and the rich weretwo distinct and sometimes rival sources of authority in early Christianity.109

Factors resulting from the financial depression of a church in apparentcompetition with rival group or groups which, along with their alterna-tive theological agendas, may also have held a financial advantage, andthe parallel problems stemming from social stratification, unite theauthor of Ep. Apost. with at least one Asian church of the early secondcentury, the church of Polycarps Smyrna.

4. Historical Circumstances: Earthquakes and Plagues

There are other historical elements embedded in chs. 3437 of Ep.Apost. which point to an Asian provenance and which can also aid ussomewhat in the search for the time of its composition.

Ep. Apost. 34 begins a new section of the work in which the disciplesask Jesus how they will recognize the onset of the wonders in heavenand upon earth before the end of the world comes (34.3). Jesusresponds, I will teach you, and not only what will happen to you, but(also) to those whom you shall teach and who shall believemostnaturally a reference to readers in the authors own day. What follows isa description of portents and disasters borrowed largely from theSynoptic Gospels and the Apocalypse.110 But interest focuses finally onearthquakes, drought, and a plague:

109. Harrill, Ignatius, 141.110. And he said to us, Then will the believers and also they who do not believe

see a trumpet in heaven [cf. Mt

hill epapost1999

Documents