Christian Texts and History • Re: Further evidence that Ignatius faced old deniers of the historicity of Jesus

• If the archives are the Old Testament, then the historicist can't explain why Ignatius is rejecting them in the tranchant answer "the archives is Jesus Christ".

My view is: he wasn't rejecting them. "Jesus Christ is in the place of all that is ancient: His cross, and death, and resurrection, and the faith which is by Him, are undefiled monuments of antiquity". Ignatius means that Jesus Christ's crucifixion, death and resurrection were found in the archives and fulfilled in the Gospel. Some didn't think they were found in the archives and so didn't believe the Gospel.

I agree with you that Ignatius praised the Scripture: even more reason to conclude that he could never answer: "for me the Scripture is Jesus Christ". Marcion could answer so, but not Ignatius. Is it more clear now why the archives can't mean "scripture"?

I agree with you now that the Roberts-Donaldson translation of "archive" as "ancient Scriptures" is wrong. I think it is what Ignatius actually meant, in that I assume the archives included the OT and other writings, but it isn't the best translation. However I don't get your point above about Marcion I'm sorry.

Going forward with your idea about archives being of "public memories": There's the question of where those "archives of public memories" were housed. The Philadelphians were in Asia Minor. What documents of "public memories" would they have expected to have seen talking about a Jewish man walking around Judea 70 years earlier? A Judea that had been smashed by the Romans 40 years earlier. Would anyone be surprised if they didn't find public memories about that Jewish man?

• If the object of the research was the "doctrine of Jesus", then the historicist cannot explain why a such "doctrine of Jesus" was going to be searched in archives of public memories, i.e. in the wrong place.

Surely the burden is on you. Ignatius wrote "It is written". Can you explain why Ignatius found them there, then? What did he find, in your view?

Ignatius didn't find them since when he answered:

"it is written"

he wasn't meaning:

"it is written in the archives"

but he was meaning:

"it is written in the Gospel"

What a moment, that makes no sense. "It is written in the Gospel"???

There are two scenarios: either (1) "it is written" refers to the archives, or (2) "it is written" refers to the Gospel.

Here is the key passage again:



If Ignatius means "it is written in the Gospel", then he is right. It IS written in the Gospel. That his critics respond "that remains to be proved" is neither here nor there, from Ignatius' perspective. His critics don't even say it is NOT there. Only that "it remains to be proved".

If Ignatius means "it is written in the archives" then Ignatius has in fact found the info in the archives, at least from his perspective. He has actually found his info in the archives! Again, his critics don't even say that it isn't there, only that "it remains to be proved".

But the most obvious reading for me is that Ignatius is referring to prophecies of the coming of a crucified and resurrected Christ that can be found in the archives, the archives containing prophetic works that people can check, like the library of Ptolemy as per my comment in the other thread . His critics argue that Ignatius have yet to prove those prophecies refer to Ignatius' Christ. Ignatius then claims that the Gospel proves the prophecies in the archives were fulfilled by Ignatius' Christ. That's my position. I'll let you have the last word on this. Nice chat!

Statistics: Posted by GakuseiDon — Sun Mar 24, 2024 2:27 pm

---