If the answer is yes, then I am obliged to a compressed chronology (the NT fabricated during the Justin's lifetime).
But then I come to learn that when an author refers not directly to the title of an work (as it is the case when Justin quotes Revelation and his author without naming it as "the revelation of John"), then it is sure evidence that the work being referred is relatively recent and/or still not even known in the communities.
So the vague reference to Paulinist ideas in Revelation excludes that the letters of Paul were really known (or known as such, i.e. as "of Paul").
The reference to 7 letters addressed to 7 cities in the incipit is more a reference to the wholeness of the earth being addressed by the message, than a polemical reaction against the 7 letters of Paul. These letters are probably fictions.
In the latter scenario, bye bye Revelation as witness of Paul.
And bye bye Justin himself as witness of Paul.
And bye bye Justin himself as witness of Luke/Acts (the latter inventing ex nihilo the hero called "Paul").
But then I come to learn that when an author refers not directly to the title of an work (as it is the case when Justin quotes Revelation and his author without naming it as "the revelation of John"), then it is sure evidence that the work being referred is relatively recent and/or still not even known in the communities.
So the vague reference to Paulinist ideas in Revelation excludes that the letters of Paul were really known (or known as such, i.e. as "of Paul").
The reference to 7 letters addressed to 7 cities in the incipit is more a reference to the wholeness of the earth being addressed by the message, than a polemical reaction against the 7 letters of Paul. These letters are probably fictions.
In the latter scenario, bye bye Revelation as witness of Paul.
And bye bye Justin himself as witness of Paul.
And bye bye Justin himself as witness of Luke/Acts (the latter inventing ex nihilo the hero called "Paul").
Statistics: Posted by Giuseppe — Mon Jan 20, 2025 2:21 am