(13 votes, average: 4.69 out of 5)
Loading...You may have not noticed, since so much else has been happening on the blog lately (guest posts, a debate, etc.), but I have a very loose thread going on my book on the guided tours of heaven and hell, a scholarly monograph that deals with the Christian versions of “katabasis” (the technical term for “going down” — that is, someone going down into the underworld and then reporting what he saw) in relation to Greek, Roman, and Jewish versions. The clear focus will be on the Christian texts, but to make sense of them it helps do see how they are similar to and different from those found in the surrounding cultures.
My first chapter will provide a set of comparisons of several earlier narratives (Odysseus’s encounter with the dead in the Odyssey book 11, Aeneas’s descent to Hades in Aeneid book 6, and the vision of Enoch in 1 Enoch 21-22) with the most famous and popular Christian account, the Apocalypse of Paul, which probably dates from the early fifth century but may be based on an account already from the third. This account was influential on Dante himself.
I’ve already described the three other accounts in earlier posts. Now I’ll summarize the Apocalypse of Paul’s narrative, so that, when I pick up the thread again a bit later, I can do a comparison of the four. I’ve simply lifted my summary from my book Forgery and Counterforgery (where I obviously focus on the question of authorship: why does the author claim to be Paul?)
(Apologies to those of you with amazing memories: I posted this summary already on the blog, a couple of years ago)
*****************************************************
The Apocalypse of Paul was originally composed in Greek but came to be translated into a number of languages: Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Slavonic, and Ethiopic. The text as we have it is dated at the outset: “In the consulate of Theodosius Augustus the Younger and of Cynegius, a certain respected man was living in Tarsus….” Commonly this is taken to indicate that the book was composed, in its final form, around 388 CE, but scholars today think that it may derive from the fifth century, with parts of it going back at least a century and a half earlier.
Despite its widespread popularity – down at least to Dante – the work was roundly condemned in orthodox circles, including in the Gelasian Decree. Augustine had nothing good to say about it:
There have been some vain individuals, who, with a presumption that betrays the grossest folly, have forged a Revelation of Paul, crammed with all manner of fables, which has been rejected by the orthodox Church; affirming it to be that whereof he had said that he was caught up into the third heavens, and there heard unspeakable words which it is not lawful for a man to utter. Nevertheless, the audacity of such might be tolerable, had he said that he heard words which it is not as yet lawful for a man to utter; but when he said, which it is not lawful for a man to utter, who are they that dare to utter them with such impudence and non-success.
The account itself begins with …
THE REST OF THIS POST is for members only. If you don’t belong yet, there is still hope!! You can join today and rest assured of a glorious life to come. Every penny you pay for membership fees goes to help those in need. So JOIN!
Do we have reliable knowledge, as opposed to conjectures, concerning the motivations of ancient people writing lucid accounts of katabasis? Were they consciously writing literary fiction, akin to Dante’s Inferno, and expect their readers to understand their works in this way? Or they expected and wanted their readers to take the accounts literally and seriously? I would ask similar questions concerning ancient authors of apocalpses – explicit literary fiction, sincere visionary experiences, or deceptions.
I think it’s almost always assumed they were writing fictions, though in the cses of the Christain apocalypses it’s a bit hard to say.
There is a good 8-minute video of Dr.Ehrman explaining why he is no longer a Christian after having been an evangelical. It was posted by Rick Snedeker on the “Godzooks (patheos) website on 4/25/19..
Bart
So many pseudonymous writers in the ancient Christian world show great concern for right doctrine and seemingly so little concern for what we today consider serious crimes such as fraud and forgery. Do you have a sense for how they thought of what they were doing? Did they think of themselves as authentic channels for the person in whose name they wrote [as many do today]? Or did they merely justify the means [forgery] by the ends [promulgation of right doctrine].
I have a discussion of this in my book Forged, and a longer and deeper one in my book Forgery and Counterforgery. I think maybe I’ll post a bit on this, since its such an interesting question.
Concerning “katabasis,” don’t forget to consider Dave’s decent into HAL in 2001, a Space Odyssey. 🙂
Great movie. Liked the book even better.
Was he speaking of Christians “who say that Christ did not rise from the dead” or unbelievers? And did he mean they were saying Christ did not rise at all, or just that they were denying a bodily/physical resurrection? If not at all, was there a branch of Christianity that did not believe in the resurrection, like the Sadducees? (And as for marital chastity, apparently the Catholics and the Mormons did not get that memo!)
Only the Catholic priests got it…. But I’m not sure what the first question you’re asking is referring to. Anyone who didn’t believe Christ was raised from the dead (in some sense) would be an “unbeliever” from a Christian point of view.
I thought maybe he was taking a swipe at docetism. those who deny Jesus’ bodily form and resurrection, but was wondering if we have record of any early “Christians” who advocated Jesus’ teachings on being part of the Kingdom which were not necessarily tied to his death and resurrection which eventually became orthodox Christian doctrine.
What were the ‘fables’ that Augustine referred to?
The accounts of Paul going down to hell.
Dr. Ehrman,
Do you know if your new book with be available in audio book format? If so, any chance you will narrate it? I have many of your books on CD because it is a great way to spend a long commute to work. I have looked all over for CD versions of Misquoting Jesus and Jesus, Interrupted, but no one has it (not even the great and powerful Amazon). Do you know if CD versions were made for those?
Thanks, Jay
It almost certainly will be; most of them have been. But no, I won’t be reading it. I did that with one of my books (on the Da Vinci Code) and hated it. So monotonous and rather grueling!
The Apocalypse of Paul and other later Christian writings were rejected by Augustine and the Church itself, but I wonder why the canonical books of the New Testament were not also criticized for similar fabulous stories. Were 1st Century AD writers considered more honest in their accounts, or were they simply credited with unquestioned divine authority?
These books had been accepted as Scripture for so long that they simply were not subject to the same kinds of criticism.
Dear Bart, I would like to ask a question, I hope this is the right place…
Was Peter a historical figure, and what can we know about his character?
In my evangelical youth, Peter was one of everyone’s favourite apostles – impulsive, clumsy, heart in the right place, panicked of course at the time of Jesus’ trial, but later was always giving vigorous leadership, after the resurrection and in Acts.
Did Peter exist for sure, and was he really like that?
Many thanks,
Phil Price (London, UK)
Yup, he was definitely a historical figure. I talk about what we can know about him historically, and how he is portrayed in later legends, in the first six chapters of my book “Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene”
Not really related to this but what was the bible you recommended using for the best translation? The real critical inquiry one that isn’t for apologetics.
I prefer the New Revised Standard Version, which I especially like in an annotated edition, such as the HarperCollins Study Bible.
This one I’ guessing? It then suggests books that you authored, If so, thanks!
https://www.amazon.com/HarperCollins-Study-Bible-Revised-Updated/dp/0061228400/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1556465307&sr=8-1
Yup, that’s it!
Very interesting/ enlightening post.
A slightly related question – are there any suspected examples of a scribe changing the Aramaic “Saul” to the Greek “Paul” ?
Thank you for your continuing enlightenment.
In the NT? There are fifteen occurrences of “Saul” in the book of Acts. I don’t find any textual variants indicating a change to “Paul.” But in 12:25 one Greek and one Latin scribe and a couple of versions added a phrase “Saul, who is called Paul”
Thank you!
With advances in neuroscience, I think it fair to say most physical pain gets to the brain through the senses. Some people have phantom pain; some people feel a burning on skin when there is no actual burning; some feel purely mental pain, etc. One would not need a hellish scenario such as a lake of fire or a vat of boiling oil to experience the worst levels of pain. Stimulation of the nervous system would be more efficient. So why the drama in so many versions of hell? Pain evidently requires a body and senses. Would a creator keep the brains of all his creations alive forever with the portals of the senses permanently turned up to maximum negative input? This seems absurd to me, and has nothing to do with a belief in a creator, whatever that means. Perhaps it is more about punishment and fear, powerful tools where education is weak.
If a simple transgression could lead to eternal damnation, would it not be simpler to relegate the sinner to Hell after the first act? Why would death be the logical point beyond which redemption/salvation is no longer possible? I can’t believe that this would be explained by God’s inability to control the Devil.
Another consideration is what happens when one is suddenly put in a situation of extreme pain, such as a crash, a gunshot, a traumatic amputation, or an extreme blow to the body. I have experienced several forms of such things in my lifetime. I have also heard of many stories of others who experienced similar things. One commonality of such events is that I have no recollection of the actual event. Apparently my mind shut down inputs to protect me from unnecessary horror. When I woke or just recovered a few moments later, the actual pain arrived.
When I have tried to understand why God would let so many creatures die violently, or in great pain, I came to the conclusion that turning off the pain switch at the time of the trauma was “programmed” into living creatures to avoid that final insult to the body and the mind. Perhaps only the hand of God would explain such programming, since I can’t imagine any evolutionary reason for the mind to blank out traumatic pain at the time it is inflicted. But maybe someone else has that figured out.
What is the “third heaven” that Paul refers to in 2 Corinthians 12:2? Was that a Jewish concept? A Christian concept? Something else?
Many ancient peoples thought that the heavens were layered. The idea is that God is so divine and remote he must be separated from us in stages that get progressively less material and more spiritual. You find the idea in Greek, Roman, Jewish, and Christian texts; it was especially popularized by Middle Platonism and became especailly important later in various GNostic myths.
Assuming that Paul apparently never met Jesus “in the flesh” prior to his crucifixion and, consequently, didn’t hear his teaching first-hand during Jesus’ ministry, and that, in his own (translated) words, “the gospel that was proclaimed by [Paul] is not of human origin; for [he] did not receive it from a human source, nor was [he] taught it, but [he] received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ”, was Paul’s theology substantially different than “mainstream” Jewish theology of that time? Do you feel it was substantially different from Jesus’ teaching?
Do you mean the theology of Jesus’ Jewish followers? He claimed the earlier followrs of Jesus agreed with him on the important matters, even if they became hypocritical about it. Or do you mean Jews who did not believe in Jesus? Yes, there were some obvious differences there! E.g., about the Messiah and the understanding of the function of the Law.
It was a poorly phrased question. Let me focus on the second part: Presumably Paul never actually heard any of Jesus’s actual statements and wouldn’t have been intimately familiar with his specific teachings about himself or about what is required for salvation (although Paul likely would have heard what others believed about Jesus). Paul had his own very explicit and complex teachings about Jesus and about the requirements for salvation. Was Paul accurately teaching what Jesus was teaching or was he teaching something different?
I just had a 3 hour PhD seminar on that this afternoon, and we couldn’t get through all the issues! But my view is that Paul’s views were very different, not based at all on what Jesus preached but on the cross and resurrectoin (as some have put it, he had the “religion about Jesus” rather than the “religion of Jesus.”)
Have you ever imagined how Christianity might have turned out if Paul had not converted? It seems like an interesting thought experiment for someone familiar with the culture and the history of the early church.
Yup, I mention that on my book Triumph of Christianity. Interesting though experiment indeed.
And, on a related note, is there any evidence that the author of Acts, traditionally attributed to Paul’s traveling companion Luke, actually knew or, at least, met Paul? Is the account of Paul’s conversion as described in Acts likely to have come from Paul or from stories about Paul?
No, I’d say there is considerable evidence against it. If you look up “authorship of Luke” or “we passages” on the blog you’ll see some of the resaons for thinking so.