The Apocalypse of Peter (Studies on Early Christian Apocrypha)

Apocalypse JAN N. BREMMER

PEETERS

0 2003, Uitgeverij Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, 3000 Leuven

ISBN 90-429-1 375-4 D. 2003/0602/127 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Contents

Preface

vii

List of abbreviations

ix

Notes on contributors

...

xlll

J.N. Bremmer, The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish?

1

I1

P. van Minnen, The Greek Apocalypse of Peter

15

I11

M. Pesthy, "Thy mercy, 0 Lord, is in the heavens; and thy righteousness reacheth unto the clouds"

40

J. Bolyki, False Prophets in the Apocalypse o f Peter-

52

I

IV V

E. Tigchelaar, Is the Liar Bar Kokhha? Considering the Date and Provenance of the Greek (Etlziopic) Apocalypse of Peter 63

VI

T. Adamik, The Description of Paradise in the Apocalypse of Peter

VII

78

K.B. Copeland, Sinners and Post-Mor-tem 'Baptism ' 91 in the Aclzerusian Lake

VIII I. Czachesz, The Grotesque Body in the Apocalypse of Peter

108

CONTENTS

L. Roig Lanzillotta, Does Punishment Reward the Righteous? The Justice Pattern Underlying the Apocalypse of Peter

127

J. van Ruiten, The Old Testament Quotations in the Apocalypse of Peter

158

A. Jakab, The Reception of the Apocalypse of Peter in Ancient Christianity

174

G. Luttikhuizen, The Suflering Jesus and tlze Invulnerable Christ in the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter

187

XIII J.N. Bremmer, Bibliography of tlze Apocalypse of Peter

200

Index of names, subjects and passages

204

IX

X XI XII

Preface

After the fall of the Berlin Wall the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen decided to intensify contacts with universities in Eastern Europe. In 1991 the then Head of the Department of Church History of the Faculty of Theology and Science of Religion, Professor Hans Roldanus, took this opportunity to forge links not only with the theologians of the Kholi Gispfir University of Budapest but also with the classicists of the Lorint-Eotvos University of Budapest. The initiative seemed highly promising, as the world of early Christianity was receiving ever increasing attention from New Testament and patristic scholars as well as from ancient historians. Initially, it was decided to focus on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, a genre of which various representatives had recently been re-edited or were (are!) in the process of being re-edited. After completing the study of the major Acts, we have decided to proceed with the major Apocalypses. With the widening of the scope of our series we have also changed the title to Studies in Ear-ly Christian Apocl-ypha. The series will continue to publish the results of our conferences, but the editors also welcome other studies in this field, be they proceedings or monographs. Following the volumes on the Acts of John (1995), Paul and Tllecla (1996), Peter (1998), Andrew (2000) and Thonlas (2001), this volume is dedicated to the Apocalypse of Peter-. The volume starts with a short survey of the Forsckungsgeschichte and a discussion of the old question regarding its eventual inspiration: Greek or Jewish. It is followed by a new look at the circumstances of its finding, the composition of the codex and its character, and also by a new edition of the Bodleian and Rainer fragments. The major part of the book studies various aspects and passages of the Apocalypse: the nature of the Ethiopic pseudo-Clementine work that contained the Apocalypse, false prophets, the Bar Kokhba hypothesis, Paradise, the post-mortem 'baptism' of sinners, the grotesque body, the pattern of justice under-

...

Vlll

PREFACE

lying our work, the Old Testament quotations, and the reception of the Apocalypse in ancient Christianity. The book concludes with a study of the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter. As has become customary, the volume is rounded off by a bibliography and a detailed index. The conference that formed the basis of this book took place at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen in the autumn of 2000. We would like to thank the Faculty of Theology and Science of Religion and the Onderzoekschool Rudolf Agricola, which is the Groningen Research School for the Humanities, for their financial support towards the conference. Alan Dearn helped to correct the English; Ton Hilhorst and Gerard Luttikhuizen assisted in correcting the proofs, and Birgit van der Lans was a great help in making the index. We are grateful to them all.

Jan N. Bremmer IstvAn Czachesz

Groningen, June 2003

List of abbreviations

AAA ANRW JAC JBL JECS JTS NTA

PG PL RAC RE SBL SEG TWNT VigClzI-is

zhw ZPE

Apoc~yphalActs of the Apostles Azrfstie,p und Niedergang d e romischen ~ Welt Jal7rbuch fur- Antike ~ ~ Christentum n d Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Early Chi-istian Studies Journal of Tl~eologicalStudies W. Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrvpha, tr. and ed. R. McL. Wilson, 2 vols (Cambridge, 1992') Patrologia Graeca Parrologia Latirla Realle.~ikonfiir Antike und Christentum 'issenRealenc~~clopiidieder classische17 Alter.t~rms~' schaft Society of Biblical Lite~.ature Supplen7er~tuinEpigrapkicun~Graecum Tl7eologisches Worterbuch zlr~nNeslen Tesran7ent Vigiliae Clzristianae Zeitschrifr fiir die ne~ltestan7entlickeWissenschaji Zeitschrift f i i ~Papyrologie und Epigraphik

Notes on Contributors

Tamas Adamik b. 1937, is Professor Emeritus of Latin at the LorBnt-Eotvos University of Budapest. He is the author of the following studies in Hungarian: A Commenta~yon Catullils (1971), Martial and His Poetry (1979), Aristotle 's Rhetoric (1982), Jerome's Selected Works (1991), A Histo~yo f Roman Literature I-IV (199396), Ancient Theories of Style fr-om Gorgias to A~rgustine(1998), Martial: Selected Epigrams (2001), and translator of Ioannes Saresheriensis: Metalogicon (2003). He is also the editor of new Hungarian translations of the Apoc13plial Acts of the Apostles (1996), the Apoc13phal Gospels ( 1996), the Apocryphal Apocalypses ( 1997), and the Apocryphal Epistles (1999). Janos Bolyki b. 1931, is Professor Emeritus of New Testament Studies at the KBroli GBspBr University of Budapest. He is the author of Jes~lTischgenieirlschaften (1998), and of the following studies in Hungarian: The Questions of the Sciences in the History of Tlieologj~ in the 20th Centu~y(1970), Faith and Science (1989) and T17e Tahle Fellowships of Jes~is(1992), Principles and Methods of New Testan~eiltInterpretation (199g2), The Ecological Crisis in Tl7eological Perspective (1999), True Witness: Con7rnentary to the Gospel of John (2001), and The Gospel of Johrl in the Mirror of the Greek Tragedy (2002). He co-authored, in Hungarian, Codes D in the Book of Acts (1995) and Revelation: Two Approaches (1997). Jan N. Bremmer b. 1944, is Professor of History and Science of Religion at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Tl7e Early Greek Concept of the Soul (1983), Greek Religion (1999') and The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (2002); co-author of Roman Myth and Mythography (1987), editor of Interpretations o f Greek Mythology (1987), From Sappho to de Sade: Moments in the History of Se,i--

CONTRIBUTORS

xi

uality (1989), The Apocryphal Acts of John (1995), The Apocrvphal Acts of Paul and Tlzecla (1996), The Apoclyphal Acts of Peter (1998), The Apoc~yplralActs of Andrew (2000) and The Apocryphal Acts of Thomas (2002), and co-editor of A Cultural Histo~yof Gesture (1991), Between Poverty and the Pyre. Moments in the history of widowhood (1995), A Cultural Histo~yof Humour (1997) and The Metamorphosis of Magic (2003).

Kirsti Copeland b. 1971, is a Woodrow Wilson Fellow at the University of Redlands in southern California. She completed her dissertation, Mapping tlie Apocalypse of Paul: Geography, Genre and Histoly, at Princeton University in 2001. She is the author of 'The Earthly Monastery and the Transformation of the Heavenly City in Late Antique Egypt', in A. Yoshiko Reed and R. Abusch (eds), In Heaven as it is on Earth (2003) and of 'Paulusapokalypse' in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, fourth edition (2003). Istvan Czachesz b. 1968, is a postdoctoral fellow of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Con7missior7 Narratives: A Comparative Studv of rlze Canonical and Apocryphal Acts (2003), in Hungarian, of Gaia's Two Faces (1996), co-author of Codes D in the Book of Acts (1995), editor of Disciples, Wonde~workers,Martyrs (1997: a volume of essays on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles), and translator of Tyconius' Book of Rules (1997). Attila Jakab b. 1966, teaches Geopolitics of Religions at the International Centre for GeopoliticaI Studies of Geneva (www.geopolitics.ch). In addition to numerous articles, he is the author of 20 siicles de prieres ckre'tiennes (1999) and Ecclesia alesandrina. Evolution sociale et ii7stitutio1111elle du christianisme alexandrin (IF er I F siecles) (2001). Gerard Luttikhuizen b. 1940, is Professor of Early Christian Literature and New Testament Studies at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of The Revelation of Elchasai (1985), Gnostische Geschriften I (1986) and De veelvoimigheid van her vroegste chrisrendom (2002). He is the editor of Paradise I~lterpreted(1999) and The Creation of Man and Woman (2000), and co-editor of Stories of the Flood ( 1 998).

xii

CONTRIBUTORS

Peter van Minnen, b. 1959, is Assistant Professor of Classics and Ancient History at the University of Cincinnati. In addition to numerous articles, he is the (co-)author of Papjlri, 0st1-aca,Parchments and Waxed Tablets in the Leiden Papyro10,qical Instit~ite(1991), Settling a Dispute: Toward a Legal Anthropology of Late Antique Egypt (1994), the Duke Papyrus Archive (1996; electronic address: htt~://scri~torium.lib.duke.edu/vav~rusf)and Zij die stelven gaan, groeten u (1998). He is editor, in Dutch, of Kleio goes Cleo (2001). Monika Pesthy b. 1954, teaches Theology at the Vilmos Apor Catholic College. She is, in Hungarian, the author of Origen: Commentaly on the Songs of Songs (1993), Origen, Interpreter of the Bible (1996), and translator of Origen: De Principiis N (1998) and Moses Bar Kepha: Paradise Commenra~y(2001). Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta b. 1967, is Research Assistant at the Department of New Testament and Early Christianity at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. In addition to several articles on Classical and Late Antiquity, he is the author of La envidia en el pensamiento griego. De la kpocca arcaica a1 heler~ismo(Diss. Univ. Complutense, 1997) and is about to complete his Groningen dissertation on the Apoc~yphalActs of Andl-ew. Jacques van Ruiten b. 1956, is Associate Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and Early Jewish Literature at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is author of Eel7 begin zonder einde. De doo~werking van Jesaja 65 in de interrestarnentaire literatz~za-en her Nieuwe Testament (1990) and Prin7aeval H i s t o ~ yInterpreted. The Re~lritingof Genesis 1-11 in the Book of Jubilees (2000), and co-editor of Studies in Deutel-onomy (1994) and Srzrdies in the Book of Isaiah (1997). Eibert Tigchelaar b. 1959, is Research Fellow at the Qumran Institute of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Prophets of Old a i ~ dThe Day of The End. Zechariah, the Book of Warche~r ar7d Apocalyptic (1996) and T o Increase Learning for the Understandir~gOnes. Reading and Reconst~vctingthe Fragmentary Early Jewish Sapienrial Text 4Qinstruction (2001), and co-editor of Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XXIII: Qumran Cave I 1 II (1998), The Dead Sea Sc~.ollsStudy Edition (20002), and The Sacrifice of (2002). Isaac. The Aqedah (Genesis 22) and Its I~~rerprerarions

1. The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish? JAN N. BREMMER

When in the winter of 1886-87 a French archaeological team opened a grave near Akhmim in Upper Egypt, they struck gold. In the grave they found a parchment codex with fragments of the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Peter and the Apocalvpse of Peter (ApPt). The texts immediately drew the attention of the foremost patristic and classical scholars of the time. In 1892 the meritorious J.A. Robinson (18581933) and M.R. James (1862-1936) published a 'pirate' edition based upon an unpublished version by the excavators'. In the next year the French team came with an official facsimile, but they had retouched the photographs, thus making their editio prirqceps somewhat unreliable'. On the basis of the English edition, the greatest patristic scholar of the late nineteenth century, Adolf von Hamack (18511930), published his own edition, which he followed one year later with a revised and expanded version3. The text also drew the interest J.A. Robinson and M.R. James, The Gospel according to Peter and the Revelation of Peter- (London, 1892). For the codex, see now Van Minnen, this volume, Ch. 11. U. Bouriant, 'Fragments du texte grec du livre d ' ~ n o c het de quelques Ccrits attribuCs $ saint Pierre', Mhnzoires publihs par les Menzbres de la Mission Al.chPologique Fr-a~zcaiseall Caire I X . 1 (Paris, 1892: editio princeps); for photogravures of the manuscript, see A. Lods, ibidem, IX.3 (1893). For urzd die more reliable photographs see 0. von Gebhardt, Das E~~angelbm Apokalypse des Petr-us (Leipzig, 1893). A. von Hamack, 'Bmchstiicke des Evangeliums und der Apokalypse des Petrus', SB Berlin 44 (1892) 895-903, 949-65, repr. in his Kleirze Schr-jfte~z zur alter^ Kir-che: Berliner- Akademieschr.ifre17 1890-1907 (Leipzig, 1980)

I. The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish? JAN N. BREMMER

When in the winter of 1886-87 a French archaeological team opened a grave near Akhmim in Upper Egypt, they struck gold. In the grave they found a parchment codex with fragments of the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Peter and the Apocalvpse of Peter (ApPt). The texts immediately drew the attention of the foremost patristic and classical scholars of the time. In 1892 the meritorious J.A. Robinson (18581933) and M.R. James (1862-1936) published a 'pirate' edition based upon an unpublished version by the excavators'. In the next year the French team came with an official facsimile, but they had retouched the photographs, thus making their editio prirqceps somewhat unreliable'. On the basis of the English edition, the greatest patristic scholar of the late nineteenth century, Adolf von Hamack (18511930), published his own edition, which he followed one year later with a revised and expanded version3. The text also drew the interest J.A. Robinson and M.R. James, The Gospel according to Peter and the Revelation of Peter- (London, 1892). For the codex, see now Van Minnen, this volume, Ch. 11. U. Bouriant, 'Fragments du texte grec du livre d ' ~ n o c het de quelques Ccrits attribuCs $ saint Pierre', Mhnzoires publihs par les Menzbres de la Mission Al.chPologique Fr-a~zcaiseall Caire I X . 1 (Paris, 1892: editio princeps); for photogravures of the manuscript, see A. Lods, ibidem, IX.3 (1893). For urzd die more reliable photographs see 0. von Gebhardt, Das E~~angelbm Apokalypse des Petr-us (Leipzig, 1893). A. von Hamack, 'Bmchstiicke des Evangeliums und der Apokalypse des Petrus', SB Berlin 44 (1892) 895-903, 949-65, repr. in his Kleirze Schr-jfte~z zur alter^ Kir-che: Berliner- Akademieschr.ifre17 1890-1907 (Leipzig, 1980)

THE APOCALYPSE OF PETER: GREEK OR J E W I S H ?

3

Norden was not a member of the Religionsgeschichrliche Schule strict0 sensu, but his ambitions were closely related and he maintained contacts with some of its most prominent representatives, especially Richard Reitzenstein (1861-193 1)". As Norden observed, unlike in Rome, the absence of a central authority made it possible for the Greek world to have competing eschatologies. One of these, Orphism, had become very popular with the masses, according to Norden, due to the clever organisation of the movement by schlaue Priesrer". Orphism had originated in competition with the Eleusinian mysteries, but already at an early stage both mysteries started to influence one another, just like Orphism and Pythagoreanism often became indistinguishable. Important innovations as regards the traditional picture were the ideas of a judgement on moral basis, wonderful banquets for the righteous, and a paradise-like afterlife. These new ideas, as Norden claimed, constituted the basis of Vergil's description of the underworld in Aeneid VII2. Unfortunately, so still Norden, the first two centuries of the Christian era were strongly characterised by a superstition ('Aberglaube'), in particular influenced by oriental religions, which was greatly interested in a blessed life after death. That is why we find descriptions of the afterlife by such differing authors as Apuleius and Plutarch. It is in this context that we have to read the ApPt. Norden

lo

See K. Rudolph, 'Norden und die Religionsgeschichtliche Schule', in B. Kytzler et a1 (eds), Edua1.d Norden (1868-1941) (Stuttgart, 1994) 83-105 at 95-105. For Reitzenstein see C. Koch, 'Richard Reitzensteins Beitrage zur Mandaerforschung', Zs. f. Religioizs~~issenschnfta 3 (1995) 49-80; add the observations by G. Wissowa, in G. Audring (ed), Gelehr-tenalltag. Der Briefiechsel z~~ischerl Eduar-d Meyer lrnd Georg W i s s o ~ ~(1890-1927) a (Hildesheim, 2000) 12f. " This idea of the deceiving priests, the Priestertrug, originated in Enlightenment circles in the eighteenth century and had a long and influential life, but I do not know of a substantial treatment of the theme. Norden already betrays here his interest in apocalyptic literature which would later culminate in his authoritative commentary on the Aeneid VI, cf. E. Norden, P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis VI (Leipzig, 19273).For a more recent view of Vergil's sources see R. Schilling, Duns le sillage de Rome (Paris. 1988) 89-100.

4

JAN N. BREMMER

did not present the whole of the treatise to his readers, however. He refused to insult them with the 'wirklich grauenhafter, nach meiner Meinung nur bei einem Orientalen moglicher Phantasie erdachten Hollenstrafen' (p. 229). In a similar manner, Harnack had already left the most cruel passage untranslated in a preliminary translation in the Preussische Jahrbiicher in order not to offend the sensibility of his readers13. Instead, Norden enumerated typically Greek elements in the ApPt. Successively, he noted the stream of fire (27), the wallowing in burning mire (23), the watching of the murderers by the souls of the murdered (25) and the suicides who cast themselves from a high slope, but, having landed at the bottom, were driven up again by their torturers (32). In this continuing punishment, Norden recognised an imitation of the mythological punishments of Ixion and Sisyphus. Norden concluded by observing that there was a great difference between the Greek spirit of this Christian Apocalypse and that of Jewish ones, as anybody reading the Book of Enoclz immediately would notice. One can only speculate to what extent Norden was moved to stress the perverse imagination of Orientals or the opposition between Christian and Jewish Apocalypses by his own Jewish origin. At the age of seventeen, Norden had converted to Christianity and he never came back on his decision. Can it be that he thought it necessary to demonstrate his definitive farewell to his own originI4? However this may be, his interest in the Greek elements of the ApPt had been independently shared by another German scholar, who even dedicated a complete book to it, published only shortly after Norden's article.

l3

A. Hamack, 'Die neuentdeckten Bruchstiicke des Petrusevangeliums und der Petmsapokalypse', Preussische Jahrh. 71 (1893) 36-58. l4 For Norden see most recently Kytzler et al., Eduard Norden: W.M. Calder I11 and B. Huss, "Sed sen~iendilmofficio.. ." The Corr-espondence between Ulrich von Wi1amo~)itz-Moellendorff and Eduar-d Norden (18921931) (Berlin, 1997); W.A. Schroder, Der Altertumswissensckaftler Eduard Norden. Das Schicksal eines deutscken Gelehrten jiidisclzer Ahkunft (Hildesheim, 1999).

T H E APOCALYPSE OF PETER: GREEK OR JEWISH?

5

Later in 1893, too late to take fully notice of Norden's article, Albrecht Dieterich (1866-1908) published his views on the newly discovered ApPtlS. Dieterich, too, was highly sympathetic to the aims of the Religio~~sgeschichtlicke Schule. He had started his studies with theology, but in 1886 he changed to classical philology at Bonn, where he gained his doctorate in 1888 under the aegis of Hermann Usener. It was the time that Usener prepared his famous analysis of Christmas, Das Weihnachtsfest (1888), and increasingly paid attention to what he considered the pagan elements of Christianity in order to 'carry out the purification and elucidation of our religious cons c i o u ~ n e s s ' ~Dieterich ~. was greatly inspired by Usener, his later father-in-law, and until the end of his life he always had a keen eye for pagan roots of early Christianity1'. It is therefore not surprising that, like Norden, Dieterich also looked for the Greek roots of the ApPt. In order to prove his point he painted with a wide brush. He started with a survey of Greek popular belief in the afterlife, then analysed the Eleusinian and Orphic mysteries and completed his first part with a sketch of Orphic descents into the underworld. In the second part he discussed the sinners in Hades and their punishments, but in the penultimate part Dieterich finally came to speak of Jewish apocalypticism. Although he had an eye for Greek elements in Jewish life at the beginning of the Christian era, he stressed that the author of the Apocalypse of Peter did not use Jewish writings to compose his picture of the hell. In his last chapter, Dieterich concluded that the Egyptian Christian community derived its picture of heaven and hell from Orphic-Pythagorean traditions, since most Christians would have been Orphics. In Dieterich's view, then, Orphism stood in many ways at the cradle of Christianity. A. Dieterich, Nekyia. Beitrage zur Erklarurzg der neuentdeckten Petrusapokabpse (Leipzig, 1893), who mentions Norden's article on p. 152. The second edition of 1913, edited by R. Wunsch, contains corrections, suggestions and additions from Dieterich's own copy and the various reviews. For Dieterich see the biography by Wunsch in A. Dieterich, Kleine Schriften (Leipzig and Berlin, 191 1) ix-xlii; F. Pfister, 'Albrecht Dieterichs Wirken in der Religionswissenschaft', ARW 35 (1938) 180-5. . "I Usener, Vortrage urzd Aufsatze (Leipzig and Berlin, 1907) 65. l7 For a good summary of his views see Dieterich, Kleine Sckrifen, vi.

6

JA N N. BREMMER

Dieterich's book was well received, but the lack of new data meant that interest soon shifted to other areas of early Christianity. A second phase in the study of the ApPt was inaugurated with the publication of the Ethiopic text in 1910, a pseudo-Clementine composition in which the ApPr was embedded18. The nature of the text immediately raised the problem as to how the Ethiopic version was related to the Greek fragment from Akhmim. The modem consensus is that the Ethiopic tradition is 'authentic and offers the original text of the ApPt, albeit in parts somewhat distorted'19. The Greek version is therefore always to be used with caution for the establishment of the original text. For our problem it is important to note that the Ethiopic tradition added a few more references to the Greek tradition. In c. 14, of which the Greek version was found only later (the so-called Rainer fragment), we find 'the field Akrosja (= Acherusia) which is called Aneslesleja (= Elysium)' and in c. 13 we hear of an angel Tatirokos (= Tartarouchos), but in this second phase the old question - Jewish or Greek? - no longer played a role, and we have to wait until the 1980s before the question was raised again. Naturally, the scholarly and spiritual climate had now radically changed from that at the turn of the century. New questions were being asked and new approaches came to the forefront. In 1983 the American Jewish scholar Martha Himmelfarb published a detailed analysis of what she calls 'tours of hell' in Jewish and Christian literatureZ0.Naturally, the ApPr receives plenty of attention as the oldest surviving specimen of the genre. However, instead of considering it to be 'the successor to archaic and classical descents into Hades, far removed from Jewish literature', she puts forward the thesis that these tours of hell 'find their proper context in Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature' (3). Naturally, Dieterich is now the 'bad guy', whose work is regularly lambasted for his neglect of Jewish tradiS. GrCbaut, 'LittCrature Cthiopienne pseudo-clCmentine. La seconde venue du Christ et la resurrection des morts', Revue de I'Orient Clire'tien 15 ( 1 9 10) 198-214, 307-23 (text), 425-39 (translation). l9 C.D.G. Miiller, in NTA 11, 625. 20 M. Himmelfarb, To11r.sof Hell. An Apocalyptic Form in Je~lishand Christian Literature (Philadelphia, 1983).

THE APOCALYPSE OF PETER: GREEK OR J E W I S H ?

7

tions and who is even suspected (accused?) of 'a certain kind of history-of-religions anti-Christian (and Jewish), pro-Greek feeling' (4.412'. Himmelfarb shrewdly observed that in these apocalypses a question of a seer (prophet) is followed by a demonstrative explanation from a supernatural guide. This distinctive formal feature of the tours must have developed from the cosmic tour apocalypses, of which the oldest specimen is Enoch's cosmic tour in the Book of Watchers. The latter Book also displays the same interest in rewards and punishments after death as many later apocalypses. These features, then, with certainty locate the ApPt in the Jewish apocalyptic tradition. Bauckham has added the observation to Himmelfarb's argumentation that in these apocalypses the active punishment of the wicked begins not at the last judgement, but already at death, probably a minority view among the Jews until well into the second century AD22.HOWever, Bauckham also returned to the questions posed by Dieterich. While admitting that Himmelfarb rightly observes that the tours of hell developed within the Jewish apocalyptic tradition, he also stresses that some of the punishments have clear precedents in Greek and Roman descriptions of Hades. Moreover, as in the apocalypses, in the Greek Hades the punishments take place now and not at a later stage in history2'. The conclusions of Bauckham seem in general unassailable. Yet while happily conceding his main points, we are still faced with the problem raised by Dieterich as to whether the ApPt stands in the Orphic-Pythagorean tradition. Admittedly, Bauckham himself has presented us with a large survey of Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Syrian, Israelite, Iranian, Greek and Roman descents into the ~ n d e r w o r l d ~ ~ . However, this survey is not targeted at the problem of the ApPt and neglects recent insights into the origin and development of the Orphic-Pythagorean ideas about the underworld. A balanced view

"

Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 3, 5-6, 41-5,48, 67-8, 71, 116, 119-21. R. Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead. Studies on the Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 49-80 at 70f. 23 Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 35-6, 71-2, 208-9. " Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 9-48. 22

8

JAN N. BREMMER

about Dieterich's ideas still remains a desideratum. It is therefore the aim of my contribution in the following pages to reconsider the Greek elements in the ApPt with special attention to their possible Orphic origins. Let us start with the evidently Greek names of the angels Tartarouchos (13 E) and Temelouchos (8 E)25.The first name means 'Keeper of the Tartarus' and is a strange name for an angel. It is fairly unique and, not surprisingly, occurs only in Christian literature clearly depending on the ApPr, such as the Apocalvpse of Paul (16)26, but also in the Book of TI7omas the Contender. This treatise derives from East Syria, but its basic document probably originated in Egyptian Alexandria2'; in fact, the connection between Edessa and the Egyptian Hermetica is well e~tablished*~. In any case, it is interesting to note that the name has more recently turned up as female in a third-century Cypriote curse tablet and in a second- or third-century erotic charm from O x y r r h y n c h u ~ ~The ~ . latter text mentions the 'bronze sandal of Tartarouchos', and the same sandal recurs in the famous magical papyrus from Paris (PGM IV.2335) and in a Greek spell in Marcellus Empiricus' D e m e d i c a r n e n t i ~ ~Apparently, ~. the early Church borrowed this angelic name from its pagan environment by letting the 'mistress of the Tartarus' undergo a sex-change. Its early appearance in an Egyptian milieu may point to Egypt as the place of origin of the ApPt3'. 25

For a full discussion see J.-M. Rosenstiehl, 'Tartarouchos-Temelouchos: Contribution B 1'Ctude de I'Apocalypse apocryphe de Paul', in Deusiknle Journhe d'Et~rdesCoptes (Louvain and Paris, 1986) 29-56. "s.' Paris has angelo Tartalvcllo, St Gall angelo tartari and Arnhem angel0 n~aliciae.I quote from the new authoritative edition by Th. Silverstein and A. Hilhorst, Apocalypse of Paul. A new critical edition o f three 1 0 1 7 ~ Latin versions (Geneva, 1997). " B. Layton, Nag Hanln7adi code,^ 11, 2-7: togetl~er~ 4 t hXIII. 2*, Brit. Lib. 0r.4926(1),and P.OXY. 1, 654, 655: ~ ~ i tcor1trih~rtions l? by 171an.vscholars (Leiden, 1988). 8' G. Fowden, The Egyptian Hernles (Princeton, 1993') 203f. 29 Cyprus: SEG 44.1279. Oxyrrhynchus: R.W. Daniel and F. Maltomini, Supplen7entum Magictrn7 I (Opladen, 1990) no. 49.58 = SEG 38.1837. 30 See Dieterich, Kleine Schrifren, 101f. " For the date and place of origin of our Apocalypse see most recently Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 185-94.

THE APOCALYPSE OF PETER: GREEK OR JEWISH?

9

The case of Temelouchos is more ~ r o b l e m a t i c ~Bauckham ~. writes that in 'chapter 34 of the Apocalypse of Paul he wields a threepronged fork, surely modelled on the trident of the Greek god Poseidon', but, in this chapter we only find the angel Tartarouchos, not Temelouchos, who extracts intestines with a three-pronged fork33.Temelouchos does occur in the Greek version of the Apocalypse of Paul as the name of the angel to whom the evil soul is entrusted after leaving the body (16) and who participates in the torture of a gluttonous elder (34). In the later Ethiopic Apocalypse of Mary and Apocalypse of Baruch the angel occurs at the end of the infanticide as in the ApPt. It is unclear how this coincidence has to be explained, and Himmelfarb thinks of an influence by the Coptic Apocalypse of Paul, which in turn would have been influenced by our Apocalypse. However, the Coptic Apocalypse of Paul calls the angel Aftemelouchos and the question still remains to be solved34. In a learned article, Rosenstiehl has argued that Temelouchos derives from an epithet of Poseidon, Themeliouchos, 'in charge of the foundation'. However, the other earliest sources for this angelic name, Clement (Eclog. 48) and Methodius (Symp. 2.6), give the name as T q p ~ h o G ~'in o ~charge , of care'. As Poseidon's epithet is rather rare and occurs only in Attica and on D e l o ~ it~ seems ~, unlikely to have given birth to the name of our angel. Other striking Greek imports are the mention of the Acherusian Lake and the Elysian fields as quoted above. The Ethiopic translation is here less trustworthy than the Rainer fragment which gives 'Lake Acherusia, which they say is situated in the Elysian Field'. The same combination of Acheron and Elysium, although unidentified as such, occurs in 3 Baruch. Here the angel takes Baruch to the third heaven where he sees 'an unbroken plain and in the middle of it was a lake of water' (10.2). The location is followed by those treatises that used the ApPt, such as the Oracula Sihyllina I1 (335-8) and the Apoca32

In addition to Rosenstiehl (note 25) see also C.D.G. Miiller, Die Engellehre der Koptischerl Kircke (Wiesbaden, 1959) 314; J. Michl, RAC 5 (Stuttgart, 1962) no. 239 on col. 237. 33 Contra Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 224. 34 Hirnrnelfarb, Toirllr of Hell, 101-3. 35 SEG 30.93 (Eleusis): I. Delos 290.

10

JAN N.BREMMER

lypse of Paul (22-3). From a traditional Greek point of view, the geographical location is rather curious, since in Homer the Acheron was located in northern Thesprotia, but the Elysian Fields at the ends of the earth. Apparently, the close combination derives from the belief that after baptism in the Acheron a straight transition into Paradise was possible, such as we find in the first-century Apocalypse of Moses (37.3), imitated perhaps by the late Coptic Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, by Bartholomew the Apostle (46.3 Westerhoff). However, the reason why Hellenistic Jews used this Greek terminology still remains obscure36. So far then we have found some Greek terminology but no Orphics. It is time therefore to pay attention to this elusive movement. Himmelfarb rather disparagingly talks about Dieterich's use of the term 'Orphic-Pythagorean' and stresses that we know so little about 0rphism3'. Given the relative dearth of data about Orphism at the time of her book's publication, Himmelfarb's scepsis about Orphism is understandable to some extent. However, since her book we have had a steady stream of new discoveries, such as the publication (albeit preliminary) of the Demeni papyrus3', new Orphic Gold Leaves39,new bone tablets40, and Apulian vases with new representations of Orpheus and the afterlife4'. These new discoveries enable us 36

For a discussion of the passage see E. Peterson, Friihkirche, Judentum urid Gnosis (Freiburg, 1959) 310-32; T.J. Kraus, 'Acheron and Elysion: Anmerkungen im Hinblick auf deren Venvendung auch im christlichen Kontext', Mnemosyne 46 (2003) 145-64; Copeland, this volume, Ch. 111. " Himmelfarb, Tours of Hell, 43f. 3R For a new text and translation see now R. Janko, 'The Derveni Papyrus: an Interim text', ZPE 141 (2002) 1-62. 39 For the Gold Leaves see most recently C. Riedweg, 'Initiation - Tod Unterwelt. Beobachtungen zur Kommunikationssituation und narrativen Technik der orphisch-bakchischen Goldblattchen', in F. Graf (ed), Ansicliten RI-iecliischerRituale. Fiir Walter Burke]? (Stuttgart, 1998) 36098; G. Pugliese Carratelli, Le lamitie d'oro orfiche (Milano, 2001'); A. Bemabe and A. JimCnez CrisMbal, I~wtr~rcciones para el mds a116. Las laminillas drflcas de or-o (Madrid. 2001). 'O L. Dubois, Inscriprions grecques dialectales d'Olbia du Pont (Geneva, 1996) 154-5. See most recently J.-M. Moret, 'Les departs des enfers dans I'imagerie Apulienne', Rev. Arch. 1993, 293-351; S.I. Johnston and T. McNiven,

''

THE APOCALYPSE OF PETER: GREEK OR JEWISH?

1I

to speak about Orphism with much more certainty than previous generations of scholars4*. It is now clear that in the early fifth century BC, Orphism originated from Dionysiac mysteries but very soon also became indebted to Pythagoreanism; indeed, in some respects it remains difficult to separate the One of the major interests of Orphism is salvation. To that end, Orphism adopted the just invented Pythagorean doctrine of reincarnation, but it also designed a new view of the afterlife. According to the Orphics, after death there is a strict separation between the good and the bad. The bad are penalised, but the good enjoy a life of eternal sunlight, play on green meadows and feast on sumptuous banquets. This new picture of the afterlife completely modified the traditional Homeric picture of a sombre afterlife with a stay on the Elysian fields for a few elect. The Orphic world view never became very popular and certainly in its initial stages was limited to the rich who could pay for their religious instruction and the gold for their passports into the underworld. In this respect, one can only conclude

'Dionysos and the Underworld in Toledo', Mus. Helv. 53 (1996) 25-36; M. Schmidt, 'Aufbruch oder Verharren in der Unterwelt? Nochmals zu den apulischen Vasenbildem mit Darstellungen des Hades', Antike K~tnst43 (2000) 86- 101. 42 For the most recent views on Orphism see R. Parker, 'Early Orphism', in A. Powell (ed), The Greek World (London and New York, 1995) 483510; W. Burkert, 'Die neuen orphischen Texte: Fragmente, Varianten, "Sitz im Leben"', in W. Burkert et al. (eds), Fragn7et~tsamt~~lunger1 philosophischel- Texte der Antike (Gottingen, 1998) 387-400 and Die Griechen lrtlcl die Orient (Munich, 2003) 79-106; J.-M. Roessli, 'Orpheus, Orphismus und die Orphiker', in M. Erler and A. Graeser (eds.), Philosophet~ des Altertunzs I. Von cler Friihzeit bis zur Klassik (Darmstadt, 2000) 10-35; C. Calame, 'Orphik, Orphische Dichtung', in Der neue Palrly 9 (2000) 58-69; Bremmer, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (London and New York, 2002) 15-24 (text), 141-4 (notes); a new translation of the main fragments, A. BernabC, Hieros logos. Poesia drf7ca sobre 10s dioses, el alma y el m6s all6 (Madrid, 2003). 43 For an attempt at separating the two, see Bremmer, 'Rationalization and Disenchantment in Ancient Greece: Max Weber among the Pythagoreans and Orphics', in R. Buxton (ed), From Myth to Reasotl? (Oxford, 1999) 7183 at 79.

12

JAN N. BREMMER

that Dieterich's picture of a popular cult with great followings, especially in Egypt, as a praeparario evangelica is highly imaginative, but also highly fantastic. Everything we know about the early centuries of our era points into the direction of little interest in the afterlife among the Greco-Roman population and even less belief in punishments after death44. Does this mean that Dieterich was completely wrong? That conclusion would perhaps go too far. In fact, there is at least one detail in the imaginative world of the ApPt, which can hardly be separated from the Orphic tradition. In cc. 23, 24 and 31 of the Akhmim fragment we hear of burning or boiling mire, P6pPopo~.It is interesting to note that this term does not occur in the corresponding chapters of the Ethiopic translation. This raises the question as to whether it was dropped by the Ethiopic translation or at a later stage introduced into the Greek version. Now the idea of 'boiling mire' is strange enough to be dropped by a translator. This seems particularly clear in c. 31 where the Greek 'another great lake, full of discharge and blood and boiling mire' is replaced by the bland Ethiopic 'another place near by, saturated with filth'. I take it therefore that the mire was part of the original ApPt. Now mire is not a totally unknown part of the underworld in Greek tradition. In Aristophanes' Frogs, Heracles sees a number of sinners lying in the mire, such as those who have wronged a guest, struck their parents or committed perjury (145-51, 273). The mire returns in Plato's Phaedo where Socrates says '...and so those who have established initiations really do seem not so far from the mark, but have long been saying in their riddling fashion that he who enters the Hades uninitiated and unenlightened shall lie in the mire. However, he who arrives there purified shall live with the gods, for there really are, as those of the rites say, "many carriers of the fennel-stalk, but few bacchoi (true initiates)"' (69C). In his authoritative discussion of early Orphism, Fritz Graf seems to be a bit wavering about the interpretation of this passage. On the one hand, he argues that the lines point to Eleusis, but on the other, he suggests that they also in44

R. MacMullen, Paganisn~in the Roman Enlpire (New Haven and London, 1981) 53-7.

THE APOCALYPSE O F PETER: GREEK OR JEWISH?

13

clude Orpheus and friends45.The whole context, though, with its reference to 'riddling', the repetition of 'rites' and bacchoi can hardly be interpreted otherwise than as Bacchic mysteries. And in the Republic Plato ascribes to 'Musaeus and his son' (Orpheus) the view that in Hades the just celebrate a symposium but 'they bury the impious and unjust in mud in Hades and compel them to fetch water in a sieve' (363D)46. Unfortunately, the text is not fully clear to whom this latter view can be ascribed, but it seems reasonable to accept that Plato here again means Musaeus and Orpheus. As in Aristophanes, the sinners are characterised by ethical faults, a characterisation that is typical of Orphism but not Eleusis4', it seems reasonable to conclude that mire played a big role in the Orphic picture of the underWe can also say that Orphic(-Pythagorean?) literature is the first in which we find ethical categories in the underworld, like the sinners in Aristophanes' Frogs (above). Moreover, it fits the presence of morally devious categories in the underworld that it is Orphic-Pythagorean literature in which we first find the mention of judges in ~~. it certainly seems to fit this picture that in the ~ n d e r w o r l d Finally, Orphic circles several poems about a descent into the underworld, the so-called katabaseis, circulated. Apparently, they had to enlighten people about the bad fate of the morally unjust and the happy life of the righteous in the new afterlife. From the various karabaseis written in the fifth century we can get some idea of those by Orpheus and

F. Graf, Ele~rsisur~ddie orphische Dicht~tr~g Athens it1 vorhellenistischer Zeit (Berlin and New York, 1974) 101f. J6 Note that this water carrying also occurs in what may be a remnant of a very early Jewish apocalypse, the so-called Isaiah fragment, cf. Himmelfarb, To~rrsof Hell, 94-6, 136-7. " Graf, Eleusis, 120. For the theme of the mud and its long lasting influence see M. Aubineau, 'Le thkme du "Bourbier" dans la littkrature grecque profane et chrktienne', Rev. Sc. Rel. 47 (1959) 185-214; P. Courcelle, Connais-toi toinle^n~e de Socrate r j Saint Bernard, 3 vols (Paris, 1974-75) II, 502-19. 49 Bremmer, Rise and Fall, 91-2; A. Lardinois, 'Het oordeel van Minos: boetes en beloningen na de dood', Hemeneus 75 (2003) 149-60.

14

JAN N. BREMMER

Heracles. In the case of the latter we can also see that at an early stage Eleusis appropriated parts of the Orphic picture50. This is as far as we can go. With Bauckham I would conclude that Himmelfarb has demonstrated the Jewish origin of the genre of the tours of hell. At the same time I also agree with Bauckham that behind these Jewish apocalypses there looms in the shadowy background the genre of Orphic and Eleusinian descents and pictures of the underworld, as the presence of mire strongly suggests. The place where Jews were most likely to read Orphic literature must have been Alexandria. And indeed, we now know with certainty that the socalled Testament of Orpkezcs is an Egyptian-Jewish revision of an Orphic poem5'. It may be one more pointer to an Egyptian origin for the Apocalypse of Peter-.

Graf, Eleusis, 142-9. C . Riedweg, Jiidisch-hellenistische Imitation eirtes orphischen Hieros Logos (Munich, 1993).

50

51

II. The Greek Apocalypse of Peter PETER VAN MINNEN

In this chapter I discuss the Greek fragments of the Apocalypse of Peter ( A p P t ) from Egypt from a palaeographical, codicological, and philological point of view. I hope some basic insights will follow from this discussion with implications for the historical and theological interpretation of the text. First, I want to describe the codex containing the most substantial Greek fragment of the ApPt. This has not been done before in sufficient detail. Without recourse to the original, now kept in the Coptic Museum in Cairo, part of what I am going to say will remain hypothetical. Second, I want to reconsider briefly in what sense this Greek text represents an edited version of the original text of the ApPt, known very imperfectly through the Ethiopic text and a few other Greek fragments. In an appendix I present revised texts of these fragments. When the first substantial fragment of the ApPt was published in 1892', little attention was paid to the physical aspects of the parchU. Bouriant, Fragments grecs du livre d ' ~ n o c h(Paris, 1892) 91-147. The subscription is dated to November 1891. D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened. A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta, 1988) 84, says that James had access to the text before it was published, but this is incorrect. 0. von Gebhardt, Das Evangeliun~und die Apokal.ypse des Petrus (Leipzig, 1893) remarks in his preface that Bouriant's edition was available in September 1892. James and other scholars in Europe apparently began studying the text in November 1892. Thus, J.A. Robinson and M.R. James, The Gospel According to Peter, and the Revelation of Peter (London 1892), state in their preface that Bouriant's edition arrived in Cambridge on November 17, 1892 (their own preface is dated December 1, 1892: they wrote their booklet, which is still useful, in

16

PETER VAN MINNEN

ment codex that contained it. This is quite understandable: the discovery of substantial fragments of both the Gospel of Peter ( G P t ) and the ApPt as well as the first part of I Elloch in Greek caused great excitement. Scholars focused on the text of the fragments and more particularly on the content of the G P t and of the ApPt. The circumstances of the find, the composition of the Akhmim codex, and the date of the manuscripts (plural) contained in it are very hard to pin down in the literature2. The limited palaeographical analysis focused on the date of the manuscripts, which could not be established at the time for lack of parallels. Hundred years ago few comparable manuscripts from late antique Egypt had been published. Although this situation began to change soon after the publication of the Akhmim codex, the dating of the manuscripts continued to trouble scholars. Suggested dates range from the fourthififth century (C. Wessely) through the late fifth (H.A. Sanders), fifthisixth (B.P. Grenfell and A.S. Hunt,) and sixth century (E.G. Turner) to the eighthitwelfth century with a preference for the eighthininth century, first suggested on the basis of the earliest minuscule manuscripts by H. Omont. Only in 1987, in their pioneering study on the Greek bookhands of late antiquity', G. Cavallo and H. Maehler redated the manuscripts to the late two weeks). Plates were published by May of next year (Gebhardt refers in his preface, which is dated to May 13, 1893, to these plates as having been published a few days earlier) by A. Lods, ~ ' ~ v a n g ietl e/'Apocalypse de Pierre (Paris, 1893), who provides retouched images of all pages of the codex except pp. 11-12, followed closely by Gebhardt, who gives photographic images of pp. 1-20 only. Lods also gives an image of the inside of the cover, but not of the outside. Only Gebhardt provides a sustained palaeographical description of both the Gospel and the Apocalypse of Peter in the Akhmim codex. We had to wait until 1987 for the next palaeographical analysis of the codex (see note 3 below). For a brief statement see L. Vaganay, L'~vangi1ede Pierre (Paris, 1930) 14-6. G. Cavallo and H. Maehler, Greek Bookhands of the Early B-yzantine Period. A.D. 300-800 (London, 1987) no. 41, with three illustrations of the hands represented in the codex. The hand of the fragment of the Martyrdom of Julian of Anazarhus also contained in the codex is not taken into consideration by Cavallo and Maehler. They provide a brief bibliography on earlier suggestions for the date of the codex.

T H E G R E E K APOCALYPSE OF PETER

17

sixth century. It is important to restate the case for such a date, because their study may not be in the hands of all those interested in the Greek ApPt. But first I want to say something about the circumstances of the find. The codex was found in the winter of 188611887 about 200 meters north-east from the top of a cemetery at Akhmim, ancient Panopolis in Upper Egypt. In this particular area of the cemetery Middle Kingdom tombs had also been found. On the map (fig. the three cemeteries to the north-east of Akhmim are clearly marked. Cemeteries B and C were not yet explored in 188611887, so that the codex was found in the central cemetery A. Cemeteries B and C contain tombs cut in the rock dating from the Middle Kingdom to the Graeco-Roman period. Cemetery A is quite different, being a low ridge of over two kilometers. This area has been used as a cemetery from the pre-dynastic period onwards. The tombs were dug in the surface and are generally not well preserved. This is the result not only of the wear of time, but also of human intervention. In 1884 the then director of the Egyptian antiquities service G. Maspero started digging there, but he did not exercise the supervision in person. The result is that no reliable information exists on anything that was found there. For five years the antiquities service worked on the site, but so did the local population. Both retrieved masses of objects that were carted off to the museum in Gizeh or to the antiquities market. From 1884 onwards many objects, especially textiles, from cemetery A were sold to museums around the world. Somewhere in this mess the codex containing a substantial fragment of the ApPt in Greek was found. Looking at the map and at photos from cemetery A, I would guess that the find was made in the central part of the cemetery, near Dayr al-Wastani. Where the Middle Kingdom tombs were found is unknown. The antiquities service had started from the north and was working its way to the south, which it did not reach until 1888. The first editor of the Akhmim codex claims that it was found in the tomb of a monk. This was no doubt merely an inference from the content of the codex, not based on actual indicaTaken from K.P. Kuhlmann, Materialien zur Archaologie iind Geschichte des Raunles von Achnzim (Mainz, 1983) 53, Abb. 14.

18

PETER V AN MINNEN

J)L,Dayr al- Bahri

A = al-Hawsw~S- B = (Bayt) al-Madina - C = as-Salimfini

Fig. 1 The Akhmim cemeteries (see n. 4)

tions in the tomb itself. The inference may be correct, but it should not be used as an independent fact in discussing the codex. As one can tell from the map, there are nowadays three monasteries in cemetery A. In Arabic they are appropriately called the Northern, the Middle and the Southern monastery. These are only a couple of centuries old, but they may ultimately go back to late antiquity. There were, however, many other monastic sites in the Akhmim area, and monks are certainly not the only candidates for the ownership of early Christian texts. Any Greek-speaking inhabitant of Panopolis with a penchant for apocalyptic literature may have been buried in

T H E G REEK APOCA LYPSE O F PETER

19

cemetery A. It would have been natural to include a codex with his or her5 favourite apocalyptic texts in the tomb. The composition of the codex is not satisfactorily discussed by the first editor. Unfortunately, E.G. Turner in his monograph on the typology of the early codex does not pay much attention to the codex pel- se6. The codex is in fact made up of several parchment manuscripts and the leftovers of other parchment manuscripts. Although the first editor does not say anything about the quires, I have reconstructed the codex physically with the help of paper, glue, and common sense7. The first quire containing a fragment of the GPr in Greek is a binio consisting of two bifolia or four leaves or eight pages to which a bifolium consisting of two leaves or four pages has been added (a new photo shows that pages 9-12 are one bifolium). The f i s t page contains an illustration, an ornamental cross. The second page is headed by a small cross to indicate the beginning of the text. The fragment of the Greek text of the GPr occupies nine pages, which leaves the last two pages of the added bifolium blank. At the bottom of page ten we find an ornamental border with three small crosses to indicate the end of the text. The text ends abruptly in mid-sentence. This has usually been taken as an indication that the text was copied from a defective exemplar, just as the text of the ApPr contained in the next quire. But both texts begin with a proper sentence and the ApPt ends with one, so I do not think the inference is correct. I rather This is not merely deference to feminism on my part. The only documentary attestation of a Greek reading public for apocalyptic texts in Egypt happens to relate to a woman. P. 0,iy. 63.4365 is a fourth-century letter in which the writer asks a woman to lend him/her a copy of 4 Ezra in exchange for a copy of the Book of Jubilees (the 'Little Genesis'). On this text see D. Hagedom, 'Die "kleine Genesis" in P. Oxy. XLIII 4365', ZPE 116 (1997) 147-8. ".G. Tumer, The Typology of the Ear1.y Codes (Philadelphia, 1977) 185, dating it to the sixth century. Making a mock-up of a codex helps one to get a clear physical grasp of it. Detailed descriptions can only take one so far. In this case detailed descriptions are lacking. T.J. Kraus kindly showed me some new photos of the codex.

'

20

PETER VAN MINNEN

think that the fragments of the GPt and the ApPr were considered complete in themselves, but that in the case of the GPt there was no room left at the bottom of page 10 to finish the fragment. It seems as if the scribe drew the ornamental border first and that he could not continue the text beyond it on the next page. Originally he used a binio, as in the case of the fragment of the ApPt, but towards the end of page eight he realised that he had to add more text. He must have calculated the length of the remainder and found that the text would occupy another two pages. He added a bifolium of which he thought he could use only two pages, because the other two pages would be folded before page one, thus creating a ternio. The binder, however, folded the other two pages after page ten, so that page one with the illustration remained up front. The scribe apparently could not foresee this, so he drew the ornamental border on page ten, which he expected to be the last page. He continued to copy the Greek text on page nine. When he had almost reached the end on page ten he found that there was not enough room. He put as many words in the last line as possible, but the sentence could not be completed. Presumably there was not much text left to copy. The fragment of the GPt he wanted to copy consisted of a selection from the larger text which started with a proper sentence and ended with one. This selection will not have been much longer than what we now have. I score an important point here, because the selection we have was made on purpose. What dictated the choice of this particular section will be considered later when I deal with the fragment of the ApPt, which also seems to be a selection rather than a leftover. The handwriting of the fragment of the GPt and the ApPr is the same. It is a carefully written documentary hand, which is difficult to date precisely. The scribe uses traditional capital letterforms alongside more recent cursive letterforms. The latter (occasional delta and pi, occasional final upsilon) in conjunction with telltale cursive combinations of letters (epsilon-iota, epsilon-rho, tau-epsilon) date the hand to the sixth or seventh century. Cavallo and Maehler put the hand in the late sixth century, the date they assign to the hands used for 1 Enock contained in the same codex. The hand of the GPr and the ApPt is highly individual because of its unusual but not unparal-

THE GREEK APOCALYPSE OF PETER

21

leled leftward slant. Because it tries to produce the regularity of a bookhand and avoids the flourish of the contemporary documentary hand, it uses more traditional capital letterforms and only occasionally more recent cursive letterforms. This is in fact the same process as that which produced the Greek minuscule hand in the eighth century, but the process is here seen in an early stage. Most documents of the sixth and seventh centuries were written by professional scribes such as notaries. The hand of the GPt and the ApPt in the Akhmim codex is not a typical notarial hand, but the most direct parallels are in fact found in notarial documents of the late sixth century8. The most remarkable features are the triangular delta and especially the enlarged sigma, usually in final position. The latter is occasionally but never so consistently found in documents of the sixth and seventh century. It is odd that the scribe did not use contemporary literary letterforms for these two literary texts. One would rather have expected something in the order of the biblical majuscule used by the two scribes who wrote the fragment of I Enoch contained in the same codex. Yet the scribe knew what he was doing, because, as we have seen, he calculated the length of the text before-- ----hand. Nonzina sacra are strictly limited to KC, OC, and ANOC for ~ l j p t o 0~ , ~ and 6 Gv0ponoq ~ respectively (occasionally ~ G p t and o~ 0 ~ 6 are 5 written out in full)9. The second quire is a binio consisting of two bifolia or four leaves or eight pages. It was bound upside down in the codex. The first page is left blank. No doubt it was intended for an illustration such as the one adorning the first page of the first quire, but this was never added. The second page is headed by a small cross to indicate the beginning of the text just as in the first quire. The Greek text of the ApPt occupies seven pages. On page 7 the text is headed by another small cross. Something went wrong here, because the text ends at the bottom of page 8, where one might have rather expected the V. Munch. I. 1 and 7 of 574 and 583 respectively. P. Miinch. 1.14 of 594 and P. Lond. 3.1012 of 633 use even more capital letterforms, but show less general similarity with the hand of the GPt and the ApPt. In the GPt and the ApPt there are no nomina sacra for 'I~pouoahjp, 'Iopajh, oBpav6-~' High dot and paragraph mark in MS Paragraph mark in MS Apostrophe in MS ~ a Ey'yiq i [a6]Verso The corresponding Akhmim text (34): ~ aEmpot i xirhtv Eyybq ~ K E ~ V O V [TI@!'~ ? E P [ o ~ ] [Eloov~a!h[v]y u v a i ~ ~ q a hv6peq i cphey6p~vot ~ a ( Ji Z P E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~E VaO i~ [ ~ I P E~S ~~ [lu li[ v ] ~ ~ K at]E< .cqyavtlical Tests, part 4: Pseudo-Prophetic Texts. Disco~~eries in the Judaean Desert X X X . Q~rn7r.017Cave 4 - X X I (Oxford, 2001) 17-51, pl. I. See also D. Dimant. 'Ezekiel, Book of: Pseudo-Ezekiel', in L.H. Schiffman and J.C. VanderKam (eds), Encyclopedia o f the Dead Sea Scrolls. 2 vols (Oxford, 2000) 1.282-4. Dimant, Parabiblical Texts, 24. The translation is slightly different from the previously published edition in D. Dimant and J. Strugnell, 'The Merkabah Vision in Second Ezekiel (49385 4)', RQ 14 (1989) 331-48.

''

THE OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

(3)... And thelse (things) when will they come to be, and how will they be recompensed for their piety? and the Lord said (4) to me: 'I will make it manifest [ ] to the children of Israel to see, and they shall know that I am the Lord'.

(5) And He said:] 'Son of Man, prophesy over the bones, and speak and let them be j[oi]ned bone to its bone and joint (6) [to its joint.' 1.10 And it wa]s so.

1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15

And He said a second time: 'Prophecy, and let arteries come upon them, and let skin cover them (7) [ from above'. And it was so].

1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21

And He said: 'Prophecy once again over the four winds of heaven, and let them blow breath (8) [into the slain'. And it was so,] and a large crowd of people came [to lilfe, and blessed the Lord Sebaoth wh[o (9) had given them life'.]

The parallel with Ezek 37 can be found in 4Q385.5-8 (1.6-21). This passage seems to be an answer to the question how they will be rewarded for their piety (cf. 1.2). The answer is in short that they will live again, i.e., they will be resurrected. The first question, i.e., when they will be (cf. line l), seems to be answered in the next section, i.e., from line 22 onwards, but this section is preserved only fragmentary. When one compares 4Q385 with Ezek 37, a few things catch the eye. In the first place, only the commandment of God is given, whereas the realisation is summarised (73 '3'1: 'and it was so'; 'and so it happened'). Secondly, the phasing of the process of resurrection is made explicit: 'and he said' (1.6-lo), 'and he said a second time' (1.11-15), and finally: 'And he said' (1.16-21). In the first stage, the command over the bones is given. This probably refers to Ezek 37.7 ('... and the bones came together, bone to its bone'), although the phrasing is somewhat different. In the second stage, the covering of the bones with sinews and skins is described. It refers to Ezek 37.6

166

JACQUES VAN RUITEN

('And I will lay sinews upon you, and I will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin') and 37.8 (' ... there were sinews on them ... and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them'). The third stage continues with a prophesy regarding the four winds, and refers clearly to Ezek 37.9-10 (' ... Come from the four winds, 0 breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live .. .')2'. The true meaning of the vision is given by a nonbiblical detail added to the biblical description. According to it, the resurrected people came to life and blessed the Lord who had given them life (1. 20-21)22. This means that the author interpreted the vision of Ezekiel literally, as referring to a real resurrection of the righteous in the eschatological futurez3. Bauckham gives three arguments for the dependency of the Apocalypse of Peter on 4Q Second Ezekiel. First, both texts use the words 'son of man' in combination with the divine command to prophecy over the bones. However, this argument is not of great value since the formula 'son of man, prophecy over ... and say' is characteristic of Ezekiel. It occurs about 13 times in the book (Ezek 6.2-3; 13.2, 17-18; 21.7-8, 14, 33; 28.21-22; 29.2-3; 30.2; 34.2; 35.2-3; 38.2-3; 39.1). Secondly, both transfer the account of the resurrection of the bones in the command of YHWH to the prophet to prophecy. This argument seems to be decisive for B a ~ c k h a mHow~~. ever, the argument is of not great value either, since the compositional technique to put something in the divine command what is said only in the narrative execution of the command in the biblical text occurs quite often in the literature of early Judaism, especially in the the so-called rewritten Bible2'. Thirdly, the words lp79 5~ 779

"

M. Kister and E. Qimran, 'Observations on 4QSecot7d Ezekiel (4938.5 2-3)', RQ 15 (1991-92) 595-602, have proposed a slightly different restoration of 1. 18-19: 'And let the wind blow upon them and,they will live. And it was so'. According to this restoration the breath is blown into the bones. Dimant, Parahihlical Tests, 28, considers this unlikely. Cf. Dimant, 'Ezekiel', 283. 23 According to Dimant, 'Ezekiel', 283, this is the earliest witness for such an understanding of Ezekiel 37.1-14. Later, this understanding became widespread among Jews and Christians. I4 Bauckham, 'Quotation', 441-3. 25 P.S. Alexander, 'Retelling the Old Testament', in D.A. Carson and

"

167

THE OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS

!

I

('joints to its joints') have no counterpart in the biblical text (Ezek 37.7), but do seem to have a counterpart in westa rnelajaled ('in joints' or 'in limbs') in ApPt 4.8. E;ek 37.7 MT 1 2 n

1 7

Ezek 37.7 L X X rpoofiyays

4Q385, 2.5-6 [127p];1 -

-

Y H PPY

'asem haba ' a 'esmet westa melajaled

n l n x ~ ra bur6 3 5~ ~ ~ PSY E~arspov

1nPY

-

1p13 +N p13

r p b rqv ~ &p-

ApPt 4.8

poviav ab-roii As I have said before, both in 4938.5 and in ApPt, the words of the account are transferred into a command. Both in 4Q38.5 and ApPt, the word n l n 5 seems ~ to be skipped over, although it is significant that the second word in ApPt ('a'esrnet) is put into the plural. It might reflect therefore MnYY of the biblical text. In any case, 4Q38.5 has a singular form (1nYY). It is unlikely that ApPt is at this point dependent on the Septuagint, because this version renders the odd expression l D S Y % DYY with a more intelligible expression ~ K ~ T E ~ npoq r q v &ppoviav afiroc ('each one to its joint'), in which k ~ a r s p o vreflects the odd expression, whereas ApPt retains this expression. The expression westa rnelajaled could be dependent on 4Q38.5, although this proposal is not unambiguous. The f i s t i)73 is omitted, the word 5 R is rendered by westa, which is possible, and the third word 1?73 is taken over, but without the suffix. Moreover, the fact that 'joint' is already in the Septuagint suggests that this reading reflects an ancient tradition. It refutes the claim that ApPt 4.8 should be quoting 4Q38.5 at this point26.

H.G.M. Williamson (eds), It Is Written. Scriptlire Citing Scripture. Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars (Cambridge, 1988) 99-121, at 116-7; G. Vermes, Post-Biblical Jewish Studies (Leiden, 1975) 60-91 ('Bible and Midrash. Early Old Testament Exegesis'); see also J.T.A.G.M. van Ruiten, Primaeval Histoly Interpreted. The Re~~riting of Genesis 1-11 in the Book of Jubilees (Leiden, 2000) 3-5. 0 "' also recently Dimant, Parabiblical Tests, 26 note 7.

O V

168

JACQUES VAN RUITEN

My conclusion is therefore a rather negative one. One cannot say for sure that ApPt 4.8 is depending on 4QSecond Ezekiel. Rather, it is depending on a tradition of interpretation of Ezek 37, of which 4QSecond Ezekiel is also a witness2'.

4. Psalm 24 a17d Apocalypse of Peter 17.2-6 The second explicit reference to the Old Testament occurs in the final chapter of the book (ApPt 17). It is the last of five visions of the reward of the righteous. Visions which were granted to the disciples, once they went with Jesus to 'the holy mountain'. After the vision of the true Temple, and the accompanying audition of the true Messiah (ApPt 16.9-17. l), ApPt 17.2-6 describes the Ascension. The disciples witness the ascension of Jesus, with Moses and Elijah, first to the first heaven, where they meet people 'who were in the flesh'. Jesus took with him these people and entered the second heaven. I quote ApPt 1 7.2-628: 2a b c d e 3a b

c d e f 4a b c

"

And a cloud large in size came over head and (it was) very white and it lifted up our Lord and Moses and Elijah, and I trembled and was astonished. And we watched and this heaven opened and we saw men who were in the flesh and they came and went to meet our Lord and Moses and Elijah and they went into the second heaven. And the word of scripture was fulfilled: 'This generation seeks him and seeks the face of the God of Jacob'.

Dimant, Parabiblical Texts, 26 note 7 adds that the gap of date and languages which separates the two documents makes a direct quotation unlikely. ?' The translation is according to the literal translation of Buchholz, YouiEyes. 240-2.

THE OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS

169

5a And there was great fear and great amazement in heaven. b The angels flocked together that the word of scripture might be fulfilled which said: c 'Open the gates, princes'. 6a And then this heaven which had been opened was closed. After the ascension, the disciples descended from the mountain, glorifying God, who has written the names of the righteous in the book of life in heaven. The description of the ascension is connected with the Transfiguration scene in the Gospel of Matthew. In ApPt 17.1, which describes the audition of the true Messiah, Mt 17.5b is quoted literally. Also the cloud in ApPt 17.2 ('And a cloud large in size came over head and (it was) very white') could be connected with the same verse. However, in Matthew the cloud overshadows the disciples who were with Jesus on the mountain, whereas in the ApPt the cloud became the instrument of an ascension, which is not described in chapter 17 of Mt. This might be due to the influence of the ascension scene in Acts 1.1-11, where the cloud functions as a means to deprive the sight of the disciples, but seems to be at the same time the instrument of the ascension: 'He was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight'2y. In addition to these implicit references to the New Testament, the passage also contains a twofold explicit quotation from the Old Testament. The first one is a rather literal quotation of Ps 24.6 ('This generation seeks him and seeks the face of the God of Jacob'). Ps 24.6 is the end of the second strophe of the Psalm, which starts in Ps 24.3 with a question about who may be admitted to the temple ('Who shall ascend the hill of YHWH? And who shall stand in his holy place?'). Ps 24.4-6 give an answer to this question3'. First, it sets out the ethical requirements ('He who has a clean hand and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully'). Secondly, it gives words of blessing to those who are qualified to enter the temple ('He will receive blessing from YHWH, and vindication from the God of his salvation. Such is the generation of those who seek the face of the God of Jacob'). Finally, the anwer '9

Cf. Buchholz, Your Eyes, 373. -" See J. Day, Psalms (Sheffield, 1990) 60.

170

JACQUES V A N RUITE N

to the question 'who' is made concrete: it is this 'generation'. It is 'Jacob', that is Israel. The second strophe may have its Sitz in? Lehen in the liturgy and is often called an 'entrance liturgy'". The worshipper seeks to enter the Temple and is instructed as to the necessary conditions. In the actual Psalm, this so-called entrance liturgy is part of a larger liturgical piece, which might involve a kind of procession into the Temple (the third strophe of the Psalm, Ps 24.7-10)32. It sings the praise of YHWH. the King of glory, the Lord of Hosts, who has been victorious over the waters at the creation (cf. the first strophe, Ps 24.1-2). In the following table, the Hebrew text of Ps 24.6 is compared with the actual quotation of it in ApPr 17.4: Psalnt 24.6 1

1 117 3 350 Ili?Y9 7-35 -Wi?3n Such is the generation of those who seek him, who seek your face, (it is) Jacob. Selah.

ApPt 17.4 :atitu~eledtakes lot~r ~ ~ t a h s a gaso s a la'antlnk ja'eqoh This generation seeks him, and seeks the face of the God of Jacob.

The most important difference beween the Hebrew text of Ps 24.6 and ApPt 17.4 can be found in the closure of the verse. In Ps 24.6 'your face' is object of the verb 'to seek', whereas 'Jacob' is n0t.a vocative, but explains 'the generation'. According to the Psalm, this generation is Jacob. The structure of the parallelism in the Masoretic text of Ps 24.6 is fine: it has a clear chiastic pattern3'. The actual text, however, contains some problems. In the first place, there is a transition from 3rd person singular ('who seek him') to 2nd person singular ('your face'). This incongruence could indicate that the Psalmist addresses himself directly to God at the end of his wor~hip"~. Al3'

See, e.g., Day, Psalms, 13, 60 Cf. H.-J. Kraus, Psalmen I (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 197g5) 343-4; J. Ridderbos, De Psalmert I, Ps 1-41 (Karnpen, 1955) 208. 33 The structure is according to the pattern ab b'a', in which a (117 37) corresponds with a' (3pY9), and b (lWl7) with b' (1-35 -Wp2n). 34 S O Ridderbos, Psalmen. 2 13. 3'

THE OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS

171

though this transition is not impossible, it is unexpected and surprising. The second problem is the syntactical function of Jacob at the end of the verse, which can not function as a vocative. It should therefore be taken as explaining ' g e n e r a t i ~ n ' ~Although ~. also this solution is not impossible either, one would have expected something like Xl;l ('he is') or ;lT ('this is') before 'Jacob'. These problems are reflected in the history of the text. Whereas the Targum changes the 2nd person into the 3rd person ('who seek his face, (it is) Jacob'), the Septuagint and the Peshitta omit the suffix of the 2nd person singular. They add 'God', and connect it with 'Jacob': 'That is the generation of those who seek him, who seek rhe face of the God of Jacob'. All these changes in the textual history of Ps 24.6 can be considered as attempts at clarifying the difficult Hebrew text which underlies the Masoretic version. I think therefore that the Masoretic text reflects the more original reading. ApPt 17.4 has a syntactical structure somewhat different from the massoretic text of Ps 24.6. It has the verb ('he seeks') and an object ('the face of the God of Jacob'). It may be clear that ApPt 17.4 reflects the alternative reading of the Septuagint and the Peskitta. Whereas in the biblical text 'Such is the generation' refers to the worshipper with clean hands, who is about to enter the temple (cf. Ps 24.4), in ApPt 'this generation' refers to 'the men who were in the flesh', waiting in the first heaven before entering the second heaven. Although the text does not explain who these men in the flesh are, the reference to Ps 24 makes clear that they are the rigtheous, probably not yet covered with their heavenly clothes, and not yet having entered the sanctuary. They are waiting in a kind of hall, before they enter, in the following of Jesus, into the real sanctuary. It is clear that Ps 24 does not receive a historical interpretation. It is neither David36 nor Solomon3', nor any other worshipper, who asks himself if he is able to enter the sanctuary38, but the text is eschatologically and

35

See N.A. van Uchelen, Psalnzei7 II (Nijkerk, 1977) 168. Cf. Krauss. Psalmen, 348. " Cf. Day. Psalms. 74. 3"idderbos, Psalinen, 208, 214, opts for a post-exilic date of the psalm. 36

172

JACQUES VAN RUITEN

cosmologically interpreted39. The righteous people are waiting after their death in the first heaven. The last explicit quotation (ApPr 17.6: 'Open the gates, princes') refers also to Ps 24, i.e., Ps 24.7a, 9a ('Lift up your heads, o gates'). Also here ApPt does not follow a text that is identical with the Masoretic text. It comes close to the Septuagint. The Sepruagint of Ps 24 (23).7a, 9a reads: 'Lift up the gates, your princes' (Piparc nbhaq oE Pipxovrsq 6pi3v). The wording of the Vorlage of the Septuagint seems to be the same as the massoretic text of Ps 24.7a, 9a: lNW O3'WNl P57YW, but the syntactical construction of the verse is interpreted differentlfO. The vocative 097YW ( ' 0 gates') is read by the Septuagint as an accusative, whereas the accusative of the Hebrew text (O3'WNl: 'your heads') is interpreted by the translator as a nominative. Morover, the reference of D3'WN'l ('your heads') is interpreted as referring to a 'person' (01 Pipxovrsq). In the Sepruagint, the word Pipxov seems to be used especially with regard to people who exercise power over other people, the 'princes of the people', the enemies, the adversaries of the people of God. In the Sepruagint version of Ps 24.7-10 the princes function as adversaries of the righteous, and especially as the adversaries of the might of YHWH. They try to prevent him from entering the holy city, from showing his power and kingdom. Because &pxovreq belongs to the same semantic field as Paothsbq (cf. Ps 24 [23].7a, 8a, 9b, lOa), and the princes are the adversaries of the King YHWH, it is not surprising that ih certain interpretations of Ps 24.7-10 the hpxovrsq are understood as supernatural beings. This is also the case in ApPt. However, it is not completely clear whether 'the princes' does refer to foreign powers, adversaries of the rigtheous, or not. It is not completely impossible 39

The Fathers interpreted Ps 24 as a Messianic psalm. Especially, they interpreted it typologically as the entrance of Christ after his ascension to heaven, cf. Ridderbos, Psalmen, 24. According to E. Kahler, Studien zum Te Deum lrnd i u r Gesclrichte des 24. Psalm in der Alten Kirche (Gottingen, 1958) 53-5, ApPt 17.2-6 reflects the first christological interpretation of Psalm 24; cf. Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 115. In rabbinic exegesis, one can find traces of a messianic interpretation of this psalm as well. See Midlnsk Leqalr Tob 130a and Targum Psalm 24.7-10, cf. Kahler, Studien, 47-8. 40 Kihler, Studien, 48-9.

THE OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS

173

that the princes of the quoted text from Ps 24.7a, 9a are the same as the angels mentioned in ApPt 17.5. In that case, the flocking together of the angels is the same action as the opening of the gates. However, it is more probable that they refer to another sort of group, adversaries of the angels, servants of Beliar, Satan. Comparable to the massoretic text of Ps 24, where the gates are closed for the entrance of YHWH, or the Sept~~agint version of Ps 24 (23), where the princes, the foreign kings, try to prevent YHWH from entering the city of his throne, Jerusalem, in the ApPt they try to prevent the Lord and the righteous people from entering into the higher heavens. The author of ApPt does not quote only Ps 24.7a, 9a, but he presupposes the whole Psalm. The quotation makes clear that it is the princes, the servants of Satan, who kept closed the gates. Most probably these are the gates that give entrance from the second into the third heaven".

The ApPt contains three explicit quotations, all from the Old Testament. All three have an introduction formula, a phenomenon that is exceptional in the ApPt. The form and function of the quotation differ in these places. In the first one, the reference to Ezek 37 is fragmentary. It may be called a summarising quotation. We did not exclude the possibility that ApPt did not make direct use from the biblical text, but from an intermediary text, although we did not accept this text as 4Q385, as others have done. It is therefore safer to say that the ApPt depends on a tradition of interpretation of Ezek 37. The second and third references are both to P s 24. The whole Psalm, in the version of the Septuagint, is presupposed, although only very few phrases are actually taken over. It is an eschatological and cosmological interpretation of the Psalm. The Psalm is taken as a prophecy to the Ascension of the Lord during which adversary powers should be conquered.

." The text does not state this explicitly. However, it is unlikely that the gates between the first and second heaven are meant, since the crowd is already in the second heaven.

XI. The Reception of the Apocalypse of Peter in Ancient Christianity A T n A JAKAB

According to Richard Bauckham', the Apocalypse of Peter (ApPt) 'deserves to be studied for the following reasons': 1) 'It is probably the most neglected of all Christian works written before' the middle of the second century. 2) It 'derives from Palestinian Jewish Christianity during the Bar Kokhba war of 132-135 C.E. 1. ..I It deserves an important place in any attempt to consider the very obscure matter of what happened to Jewish Christianity in Palestine in the period after 70 C.E.' The date and provenance suggested by Bauckham are generally accepted by scholars (Dennis D. Buchholz', Paolo Marrassini3 and Enrico Norelli4). 3) 'Outside Palestinian Jewish Christianity, the Apocalypse of Petel- evidently became a very popular work in the church as a whole, from the second to the fourth centuries'. 4) And finally, this work should be studied because it 'preserves Jewish apocalyptic traditions'. This paper provides a chronological and geographical analysis of the reception of the ApPt, following Buchholz' distinction 'between R. Bauckham, Tlte Fate of the Dead. Studies on the Jewish and Cltristian Apocalypses (Leiden, 1998) 160- 1. D.D. Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened. A St~rdy of tlte Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta. 1988) 398-412. P. Marrassini, 'L'Apocalisse di Pietro', in Y. Beyene et al. (eds), Etiopia e oltre. Stlrdi in onore rli Lanfr-anco Ricci (Naples, 1994) 17 1-232. E. Norelli, 'Pertinence thCologique et canonkite: les premibres apocalypses chretiennes', Apocrypha 8 (1997) 147-64 at 157. I

RECEPTION

175

direct and indirect witnesses'" Our survey will enable us to test Bauckham's third thesis, namely, that the ApPr was 'a very popular work in the church' with a 'considerable influence in the early Christian c e n t ~ r i e s ' ~ .

2nd century Direct Witness The Muratorian Canon 71-72 writes, 'We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter (scripta apocalypse etian7 lolzanis et Petri tanturn recipimus) although some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church". From this fragment we can conclude that the ApPt was known before 200 in Rome and read in churchR. For the author of the catalogue there is no difference between the two texts (John and Peter). Some Christians, however, objected to its liturgical use. The reasons for their objection are unknown. We do not know if they rejected the text because of its content, its authenticity, or for some other reason. Indirect Witnesses 1) The Sibylline Oracles 2 (Syria, ca. AD 150) probably used the ApPt as a source. Buchholz proposed ten parallels between the two texts9. 2) There are also parallels between the Epistula apostolorum (Syria, second half of the second century) and the ApPt: Buchholz, Your Eyes, 20, writes, 'Direct witnesses are references in which the document is mentioned by name or quoted directly. Actual texts of the apocalypse are also included here. Indirect witnesses are those which use, refer to, or allude to the apocalypse without revealing that this is their source.' In my contribution I quote the ApPt in Buchholz' translation. "auckham, The Fate, 6. B.M. Metzger, The Canon o f the New Testament (Oxford, 1987) 307. J.-D. Kaestli, 'La place du Fragment de Murarori dans I'histoire du canon. A propos de la thbse de Sundberg et Hahneman', Cristianesimo nella stor-ia 15 ( 1 994) 609-34. "uchholz, Your Eyes, 45.

'

176

ATTILA J A K A B

Epist. upost. 16 Epist. apost. 26 Epist. apost. 39 Epist. upost. 51

ApPt ApPt ApPt ApPt

1.6-7 4-6 14.1-3 17

Conclusion: In the second century the ApPt was known only in Rome and Syria. It was probably read in the Christian assembly in Rome, but some Christians disapproved of its use. There is no witness to its use in Syria. 3rd century Direct Witnesses 1) Clement of Alexandria, Eclogue pr-opheticae (Ecl. pl-oph.). This work consists of quotations and was written after the author's departure from Alexandria (202), probably in Palestine (Jerusalem). Ecl. pr-opk. 41 : According to Clement, 'The Scripture says that the children exposed by parents are delivered to a protecting (t2melouckos) angel, by whom they are brought up and nourishedlO. [...I Wherefore Peter also says in his Apocalypse (ni.rpo5 Ev .ti ' A X O K ~ ~ (~pI~~l ~E i"and L) : a flash of fire, coming from their children and smiting the eyes of the women"'". Ecl. pl-oplz. 48: 'Peter in the Apocal~psesays that the children born abortively receive the better part. These are delivered to a protecting (t2melo~~chos) angel'". Ecl. pr-oph. 49: 'the milk of the mothers which flows from their breasts and congeals, says Peter in the Apocalvpse, shall beget tiny flesh-eating beasts and they shall run over them and devour them'I3. Cf. ApPt 8.10. ApPt 8.4: 'When the babies call out to God, lightning comes out from them, burning into the eyes of the women who managed their destruction with this adultery'. Akhmim Greek Fragment 26: 'and flames of fire came out from them and struck the women in the eyes'. l 2 Cf. ApPt 8.10. l3 ApPt 8.8-9: 'Their mother's milk runs from their breasts. It thickens and becomes putrid. Meat-eating animals are in it, and they go in and out of it, and they are punished forever, with their husbands.' lo

'I

RECEPTION

177

For Clement of Alexandria, the ApPt had a certain authority in some moral questions, especially concerning the attitude to the undesirable children. But it is not so clear if he considered this work as Scripture. Nevertheless, the difference between Clement and Eusebius of Caesarea is important. According to Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 6.14.1) Clement included the ApPt in the books ( z ? ~&v&taefl~ou ypacpijq) upon which he commented in his Hypotyposeis. For Eusebius, however, the ApPt was a disputed writing (&vzth&y6p~vov), together with the Epistle of Jude, the remaining Catholic Epistles, and the Epistle of Barnabas. 2) A further witness is the 'pagan writer', quoted by Macarius Magnes. Macarius was probably the bishop of Magnesia (Asia Minor) at the beginning of the fifth century14. In the Apocr-iticus, written in a dialogue form, there is a debate between a pagan philosopher and a Christian. The attack on Christianity provides a summary of the fifteen books of Porphyry's Against the Chrisrians, written sometime before AD 270. According to B u ~ h h o l z ' ~'while , quoting passages from the New Testament, after he has repudiated the saying from the Synoptics "Many will come in my name saying I am the Christ" and before he attacks some of Jesus' parables, Porphyry digresses to treat the topic of the destruction of heaven and earth. He quotes twice from the ApPt in order to refute two of its teachings'. Apocriticus 4.6: 'By way of superfluity let this word also be quoted from the Apocalypse of Peter. He introduces the view that the heaven will be judged along with the earth in the following words, "The earth will present before God on the day of judgment all men who are to be judged and itself also will be judged with the heaven that encompasses it"'I6. Apocriticus 4.7: 'And again he says this statement which is full of impiety, saying "And every power of heaven shall bum, and the l4

S.J. Voicu, 'Makarios Magnks', in Dictionnaire Encyclopddique du Christianisme Ancien, vol 2 (Paris, 1990) 1520. l5 Buchholz, Your Eyes, 30-1. l6 ApPt 4.13: 'The earth will return everyone on judgment day because then it will have to be judged at the same time, and heaven too.'

178

ATTILA JAKAB

heaven shall be rolled up like a book and all the stars shall fall like leaves from a vine and like leaves from a fig-tree"'17. Provided that these references are from Porphyry, it can be concluded that the ApPt was known in the West (in Rome) in the second half of the third century, and still used as a work with authority (as Scripture) by some Christians. It is possible that Macarius never read the ApPt (see Apocriticus 4, 16). In any case, he did not consider it as Scripture. Indirect Witnesses 1) In Hippolytus of Rome (died AD 235) we can find two allusions. The first allusion is found in his 0 1 7 the U17iverse (llspi TOG n a v ~ 6 q ) ' written ~, before 225. The second reference is found in The Refirtation of all Heresies (Elenchos) 10.34.2, written after 222, ~. two referwhere the author uses the adjective r a p z a p o G ~ o q 'These ences suggest that Hippolytus knew the ApPt. 2) The Acts of T l ~ o m a 5s 1-58 (Edessa, first half of the third century). The 'sixth act' of the book is about a young Christian who killed his girlfriend because she refused to live in celibacy with him. The girl is raised from the dead by the apostle and gives (chs. 55-57) a description of the hell, which she had visited. This description suggests that the author of the Acts of Thonlas was acquainted with ApPt 7-12. 3) Pseudo-Cyprian, De laude marh~r-ii( O n the G l o ~ of y ~ar-or--' dorn) 19-2120.This is a sermon attributed to Cyprian and presently dated to the early 250s2I. Judging by the details of the punishments, the author probably knew the ApPt. Cf. ApPt 5.4-5. Hippolytus, 'Against Plato, on the cause of the Universe', in T l ~ eAnteNicene Fatl~er-s5, 22 1-3. l9 M. Marcovich (ed). Hippolytw. Reficturio ornniun? haeresi~rnl(Berlin, 1986) 415: ~ a rapraporjxwv i byyihwv Kohaorov cpop~pov6ppa. Cf. ApPt 13.5. ?O The Ante-Nicene Fathers 5, 579-87. For date and place see the concise discussion by .I.Doignon in R. Herzog and P.L. Schmidt (eds), Hai~dhucllder- lateiilischerl Literatzcr- derAntike IV (Munich, 1997) 578. l7 Is

"

RECEPTION

179

4) Pseudo-Cyprian, Adver-sos aleatores (Against Dice-Thrower-s) 8. The dependence of this sermon from North Africa at the end of the third century on the ApPt (cf. 12.5-6: 'wheels of fire') is likely but cannot be proven2'. 5) The author of the Coptic Apocalypse of Elijah (3rd century) was acquainted with the ApPtn. This is suggested by the following parallels: Apoc. of Elijah Apoc. of Elijnh Apoc. of Elijalz Apoc. of Elijah

13.10-14.9 18.1-20.15 23.1-10 23.1 1-24.2

ApPt 1.5-7 ApPt 2.7-13 ApPt 6.3 ApPt 14.1-3; 13.1-2

Conclusion: In third century Christianity the ApPt was better known than it had been a hundred years earlier. We have witnesses for Rome, Palestine (Clement), Edessa, North Africa and Egypt. But we can also see that our treatise is not really a bestseller. In Rome the community no longer read it in the assembly. If we consider the other testimonies we can infer that the use of the ApPt was limited. There is no witness in the greatest centres of ancient Christianity, such as Alexandria, Carthage, or Antiochia. We have only one witness from Syria.

Direct Witnesses 1) The Bodleian (ApPt 10.67) and Rainer (ApPt 14.2-5) fragments of the Greek ApPt derive from the same codex and show that the ApPt was known in Egypt in the fourth century. 'The manuscript is in the same tradition as our Ethiopic text, but the Greek by this time already shows signs of being corrupt"'. 2) According to Jerome (De vir-is illustr-ihus83, written at Bethlehem in 393), Methodius was bishop of Olympus, then of Tyre, and

'*

For date and provenance see J. Doignon in Herzog and Schmidt, Handhuch IV. 505-8. D. Frankfurter, Elijall in Upper Egypt (Minneapolis, 1993). Buchholz, Your Eyes, 34.

''

180

A'TTILA JAKAB

died a martyr's death in Chalcia in AD 31 1-312. We do not know any more details of his life. It is possible that he was not a bishop but only a Christian teacher and writer in Lycia at the end of the third and the beginning of the fourth century2s. In his Symposium (2.6) Methodius quoted the ApPt 'to defend the proposition that all human generation is the work of God, even the births which result from ad~ltery''~: Whence, also, we have received from the inspired writings, that those who are begotten, even though it be in adultery, are committed to guardian angelsz7. But if they came into being in opposition to the will and the decree of the blessed nature of God, how should they be delivered over to angels, to be nourished with much gentleness and indulgence? And how, if they had to accuse their own parents, could they confidently, before the judgment seat of Christ, invoke Him and say, 'Thou didst not, 0 Lord, grudge us this common light; but these appointed us to death, despising Thy

Even if Methodius knew the ApPt and highly regarded it, it is uncertain whether this writing was very widely known by Christians in Asia Minor. Methodius fails to identify the title of his source. 3) Eusebius of Caesarea. The church historian, who discusses the writings of Peter, accepts only the first Epistle. He notes that 'the so-called second Epistle we have not received as canonical, but nevertheless it has appeared useful to many, and has been studied with other Scriptures' (Hist. eccl. 3.3.1). Eusebius continues: On the other hand, of the Acts bearing his name, and the Gospel named according to him and the Preaching called his and the so-called Revelation ( T ~ V~ahoup6vqv'Ano~ahuynv).we have no knowledge at all in the Catholic tradition, for no orthodox writer of the ancient time or of our own has used their testimonies. (Hist. eccl. 3.3.2)z9 25

C. Moreschini and E. Norelli, Histoire de la litte'rature chre'tienne antique grecque et latine, vol 1 (Geneva, 2000) 364-5. 26 Buchholz, Your Eyes, 35. l7 Cf. the quotations of ApPt 8.10 by Clem. Alex., Ecl. Proph. 41 and 48 (see above). IR The Ante-Nicene Fathers 6, 316. Cf. ApPt 8.7; Marrassini, 'L'Apocalisse di Pietro', 206. 29 Trans. K. Lake (Loeb).

1

RECEPTION

18 1

Later in the Church History (3.25.1-3), Eusebius summarises the writings of the New Testament. Following the list of disputed books (&wth&y6p&va) which are 'the Epistle called of James, that of Jude, the second Epistle of Peter, and the so-called second and third Epistles of John', Eusebius continues with the v60ot, 'the books which are not genuine'. [They are] the Acts of Paul, the work entitled the Shepherd, the Apocalypse of Peter, and in addition to them the letter called of Barnabas and the so-called Teachings of the Apostles. And in addition, as I said, the Revelation of John, if this view prevails. For as I said, some reject it, but others count it among the Recognized Books. Some have also counted the Gospel according to the Hebrews in which those of the Hebrews who have accepted Christ take a special pleasure. These would all belong to the disputed books, but we have nevertheless been obliged to make a list of them, distinguishing between those writings which, according to the tradition of the Church, are true, genuine, and recognized, and those which differ from them in that they are not canonical but disputed, yet nevertheless are known to most of the writers of the Church. (Hist. eccl. 3.25.4-6)

We must notice the difference between the author of the Muratorian Fragment and Eusebius. The first accepted both the Apocalypse of John and the ApPt as writings with authority: they were read in the church assembly in Rome. For Eusebius, more than a century later, they belong to the disputed books that must be rejected. 4) Like Eusebius, Jerome, De vir-is illustribus 1.5, considered the ApPt as a rejected writing. Libri autem, e quibus urz~tsActorum eius inscribitur, alius Evangelii, tertius Praedicationis, quartus 'Ano~ahuyfio~, q~ririt~rs Iudicii inter apocryphas script~rrasrepudiantur30.

5) The Hontilv on the Parable of the Ten Virgins is an allegorical explanation of Matthew 25.1-13. According to Andr6 Wilmart, its discoverer, this is a Latin sermon from the 4th century, probably from North Africa3'. This homily quotes the ApPt by title. 30

A. Ceresa-Gastaldo (ed), Gerolanzo. Gli uonzirzi illustri (Florence, 1988) 72-4. 31 A. Wilmart, 'Un anonyme ancien De X Virginibus', B~rlletind'ancierzne litte'rature et archbologie ckrbtiennes 1 (1910) 35-49, 88-102.

182

ATTILA JAKAB

The closed door is the river of f i e by which the ungodly will be kept out of the kingdom of God, as it is written in Daniel and by Peter in his Apocalypse. (lines 58-60) That party of the foolish shall also arise and find the door shut, that is, the river of fire lying before them3'. (lines 77-78) The author of the homily, an unknown member of a North African church, provides us with an important witness to the use of the ApPr as Scripture. Indirect Witness 1) Cyril of Jerusalem, Carecherical Lectures (towards AD 350). Lecture 15 contains, two parallels with the ApPt, namely, 15.20 (ApPt 6.1-2) and 15, 21 (stream of fire as an instrument of punishment). The bishop of Jerusalem witnesses the use of this writing in Palestine in the middle of the 4th century. Conclusion: In the fourth century the ApPt was known in Palestine, Egypt, North Africa and probably in Asia Minor (Methodius of Olympus). There is no longer a witness from Rome. 5th ceritury and hevorld Direct Witnesses 1) Sozomen, in his Church History 7.19 (compiled between 439 and 450 in Constantinople), writes about the customs of different nations and churches : Thus the book entitled 'The Apocalypse of Peter', which was considered altogether spurious by the ancients. is still read in some churches of Palestine. on the day of preparation, when the people observe a fast in memory of the passion of the Saviour [on Good Friday]33. According to this statement our Apocalypse was read as Scripture in the first half of the 5th century. Cf. ApPt 5.8-6.5, 12.4-7. A Select Lihraly of Nicerle and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, series 2. vol 2 (repr. Grand Rapids, 1976) 390. 3'

33

RECEPTION

183

2) In the stichometry of the biblical writings in the Codes Claromo~itanus(Paris gr. 107, a bilingual Greek and Latin manuscript) the ApPr appears in last place. The catalogue was written in Latin between the fourth and sixth centuries. It is probably Western, but we do dot have any closer information about its p r ~ v e n a n c e ~ ~ . 3) The List of tlie Sixry Books names 60 canonical and 25 apocryphal books. This list, which we find in several manuscripts, may be from 600. The ApPt is the 16th on the list of apocryphal writingP. 4) The Akhmim fragment of the Greek text of the ApPt was discovered in Egypt in 1886-1887. It probably dates from the sixth century3? It is different from our Ethiopic text and the texts quoted by earlier Christian writers. The Akhmim fragment demonstrates that the ApPt was known in sixth-century Egypt. 5) The Stichometly of Nicephorzrs is a list of canonical books. It probably dates from the middle of the ninth century. The catalogue divides the writings in three groups: recognised, disputed (antilegomena) and apocryphal. The disputed books of the New Testament are: the Apocalypse of John, the ApPt, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Gospel of the Hebrews. Apparently in ninth-century Palestine our writing was valued higher than the apocrypha3'. Indirect Witnesses

1) The Apocalypse of Paul, probably written in Palestine between 395 and 41638, shows the influence of the We can discern that the Apocalypse of John is interested in the destiny of the Church in the last days; the ApPt in judgement at the end of the world; and the author of the ApPI in personal judgement immediately after death. The success of the ApPI is probably due to this feature. NTA 1, 37. NTA 1, 42-3. 3h See Van Minnen, this volume, Ch. 11. 37 NTA 1, 41-2. 38 P. Piovanelli, 'Les origines de I'Apoca~pse de Pa~cl reconsidtrkes'. Apocrypha 4 (1993) 25-64. This dating is accepted by C. Moreschini - E. Norelli, Storia della letrerat~rracristia11a antica greca e latir~a,vol 211 (Brescia. 1996) 326-7. 39 For the parallels see Buchholz, Your Eyes, 67-70. 3s

184

ATTILA JAKAB

2) The Apocalypse of Thomas is a fifth-century document, surviving in two Latin recensions40. The shorter text (Cod. Vindob. Palatinus 16) is generally accepted as the earlier and more original version. According to Buchholz, the 'combination of similarity in form and in details of expression makes it virtually certain that the author of the Apocalypse of Thomas knew, and used the Apocalypse of Peter-'. Further, 'the Apocalypse of Thomas is a witness that heretical, probably Manichean-related groups were interested in the Apocalypse o f Peter-' towards 4004'. Conclusion: In the fifth century and beyond, the ApPr was known in Palestine and Egypt, around Constantinople, and probably in the West. We can say with certainty that it was read in a few local churches, but then it.disappears before our eyes.

Final conclusior~ As a result of this geographical and chronological survey it cannot be concluded that the ApPt was 'a very popular It was only known in some parts of ancient Christianity, and its circulation was limited in time and space. Only in second-century Rome and in some local churches of fifth-century Palestine was this writing read in congregations. As far as its geographical circulation is concerned, it was known in Rome (2nd-3rd centuries), Syria (2nd century), Palestine. and Egypt (3rd-5th centuries), Edessa (3rd century), North Africa (3rd-4th centuries), and Asia Minor (probably by Methodius of Olympus at the beginning of the 4th century). The history of the reception of the ApPt shows that canonicity is not a specific (intrinsic) value of a text. In this respect, Enrico Norelli is right when he claims that canonicity is the result of a historical process rather than being a condition of that p r o c e ~ sIt~ is ~ .necessary, in my view, to establish periods and contexts in the examination of early Christian literature. If we want to gain an appropriate picture of 40

J.K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993) 645-51. Buchholz, Your- Eyes, 73. 42 See the 'Appendix' below. 43 Norelli, 'Pertinence thCologique', 152: 'La canonkit6 est le rksultat d'un processus historique, non pas la condition de ce processus'. 41

RECEPTION

185

the development and evolution of Christianity in its first centuries, we should study not only the reception of the canonical writings but also of other texts, such as the apocrypha and the authors before the Council of Nicea. In this way we can better understand how Christianity developed its institutions and doctrine, until it became the Religion of the Roman Empire at the end of the fourth century. Appendix: Geographical and chronological o v e r v i e ~ j Rome 2nd century: Direct witness: Murator-ian Canorz 71-72 3rd century: Direct witness: The 'pagan writer' quoted in Macarius Magnes Indirect witness: Hippolytus of Rome Syria 2nd century: Indirect witness: Sihyllirze Oracles 2; Epist~rlaApostolorunl Edessa 3rd century: Indirect witness: Tlze Acts of Thomas Palestine 3rd century: Direct witness: Clement of Alexandria, Eclogue Propheticae 4th century: Direct witnesses: Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.3.2, 3.25.4; Jerome, De viris illustribus 1.5 Indirect witnesses: Cyril of Jerusalem, Carechetical Lect~~res 15 (20 & 21) 5th century: Direct witnesses: Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History 7.19; Stichonzetry of Nicepkol-us Indirect Witnesses: Apocalypse of Pall1

3rd century: Indirect witness: The Coptic Apocalypse of ElijaA

186

A

~ JA KA B

4th century: Direct witnesses: The Ruiner and Bodleian Fragments of the Greek ApPt 5th century: Direct witness:The Akhrninl Fragnlent of the Greek ApPt North Africa 3rd century: Indirect witnesses: Pseudo-Cyprian, De laude martyr-ii; PseudoCyprian, Ah~ersusAleator-es 4th century: Direct witness: Homily on the Parable of the Ten Virgins Asia Minor 4th century: Direct witness: Methodius of Olyrnpus, Synlposium 2.6

XII. The Suffering Jesus and the Invulnerable Christ in the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter GERARD P. LUITKHUIZEN

This final chapter deals with a Gnostic writing of the same name as the Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse of Peter. The Gnostic text is contained in one of the fourth-century Coptic manuscripts of Nag Hammadi (codex VII, 3)'. What the two Petrine apocalypses have in common is that they speak of revelations granted by Jesus Christ to Peter at some time during the Holy Week2. However, the actual contents of the two texts are entirely different. The Gnostic text discloses how, through several visions, Peter was led to full understanding of the nature and the mission of Christ, the mediator of the revelation. In the course of his teaching, Christ refutes the 'errors' of non-Gnostic Christian groups, notably the early orthodox Christians. The Coptic papyrus manuscript contains the complete text of the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter (GApPt) in a clear legible handwriting. However, in other respects, it is a poor copy. Almost every page contains one or more grammatically unclear phrases3. These obscurities

'

This writing was the subject of the Groningen dissertation of H.W. Havelaar, The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, 1993. It was published as volume 144 of Teste lrrld Untersltch~rrigenzur Geschickte &r altchristlicken Literatur (Berlin, 1999). I assume that the so-called synoptic apocalypse (MI24 and parallels) is in the background of the revelation in the Greek-Ethiopic writing. The setting of the Coptic-Gnostic revelation will be discussed below. Virtually all grammatical problems are discussed in Havelaar, Coptic Apocabpse, 54-69 ('Grammatical Annotations').

188

GERA RD P. LUTTIKHUIZEN

may be due to the incompetence of the translator or to an inaccurate transmission of the Coptic text. In some cases, the transcriber is likely to have inserted his own comments into the text. This could explain some of the convoluted sentences (see e.g. the opening lines quoted below). On several occasions we have no other choice than to accept that the text of the only surviving manuscript is corrupt.

I . Date of Origin In their attempts to date the hypothetical Greek original of the GApPt, James Brashler and Henriette Havelaar rightly concentrate on the terminus post quem 4. The text can hardly be earlier than the end

of the second century. The many references to texts that later became part of the New Testament preclude this5. Brashler and Havelaar also point to the polemics directed at emerging mainstream Christians, notably the rejection of their claim that 'the mystery of truth' belonged to them alone6. In the third century, the exclusive claims of the great Church were increasingly pressed upon minority groups that did not accept orthodox teaching and practice. The dating of the Greek original to the end of the second century or the beginning of the third century means that it was written 50 to 100 years after the original version of the Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse'. To Schneemelcher this seems reason enough to rank the GApPt with the later apocalypses and the Greek-Ethiopic writing with the earlier ones8. In my opinion, this is a somewhat arbitrary decision. It should be noted that the preserved manuscripts of the J. Brashler, The Coptic 'Apocalypse of Peter': A Genre Analysis and Interpretation (dissertation, Claremont Graduate School, 1977) 217; Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse,l6. See Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, ch. 6 ('The Apocalypse o f Peter and the New Testament'). GApPt 76.31-34, quoted below, n. 2q. For the dating o f the Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse see C.D.G. Muller, 'Offenbarung des Petrus', in W . Schneemelcher, Neutestarnentliclze Apokrypken II (Tubingen, 19895)563f = NTA 11, 622; Tigchelaar, this volume, Ch. IV. Schneemelcher, NTApokS II, 628-33 = NTA II, 700-12.

'

Greek-Ethiopic Apocalypse are centuries younger than the Coptic text of the GApPt. This is important if we bear in mind that we are dealing with 'living texts19.

2. The Literary Setting of the Revelation The clzronological setting of Christ's revelations to Peter is extraordinary. Christ speaks to Peter dza-ing the events of Good Friday, not shortly before the day, as he does in the synoptic apocalypse and in the Greek-Ethiopic ApPt. In comparison with other Gnostic revelation texts, the setting of Christ's teaching is also exceptional. The Secret Book of John, The Wisdom of Jesus Christ, The Letter of Peter to Philip, and comparable Gnostic revelation texts typically refer to post-Easter appearances of Christ io. These writings pretend to reveal the full and definitive teaching of Christ granted to a select group of followers; Christ manifests himself to them - or his voice speaks from the world above". It is more difficult to determine the exact location of Christ's revelation in the Gnostic ApPt. The opening lines give us a hint. Unfortunately, this occurs in one of the aforementioned obscure passages in the Coptic manuscript. In all editions, this passage has been emended. I quote Brasher's translation of 199612: APOCALYPSE OF PETER. As the Saviour was sitting in the temple, in the inner part of the hcrilding at the convergence of the tenth pillar, and as he was at rest above the congregation of the living incorruptible Majesty, he said to me: 'Peter, (...).'I3

Texts that were constantly revised and adapted to new situations. K. Rudolph, 'Der gnostische "Dialog" als literarisches Genus', in P. Nagel (ed), Probleme der koptischen Literatur (Halle, 1968) 85-107 at 91: 'Die Szene (Hintergrund, Ort) ist stets in die Zeit nach der Auferstehung Jesu verlegt.' Cf. Ph. Perkins, The Gnostic Dialogue. The Early Church and the Crisis of Gnosticism (New York, 1980) 37-58. I' G.P. Luttikhuizen, 'The Evaluation of the Teaching of Jesus in Gnostic Revelation Dialogues', NovTest 30 (1988) 158-68. In B.A. Pearson, Nag Hammadi Codex VII (Leiden, 1996) 219. l3 GApPt 70.13-20. lo

190

GERARD P. LUTTIKHUIZEN

The translation: 'the inner part of the building', is an emendation of a combination of Coptic words that does not make sense14. However, if we assume that this emendation and its translation are correct, what does the text mean?I5 Is this a reference to the earthly temple in Jerusalem or, rather, to a spiritual temple in the divine world? It is quite probable that the reference is to both places at the same time. As we will see, GApPt frequently directs the attention to a spiritual dimension in visible reality. In particular, the subsequent phrase, 'and as he was at rest above the congregation of the living incorruptible Majesty', suggests that the Saviour is in his true spiritual environment together with all those who belong to the FatherI6.

3. Physical and Spiritual Realities In our text, Peter speaks about teachings revealed to him by Jesus Christ on Good Friday. An important part of the revelation concerned the true meaning of the events of that day. Christ explained to Peter that he himself - the divine and, allegedly, impassible Saviour would not be arrested and crucified, but only the physical body of Jesus. The apostle also intimates that Christ used special didactics to teach him. For instance, after the first words had been addressed to him, Peter noticed that the priests and the people were running to-

l4 GApft 70.15-16: ii <ME? i r e n l c i i ~ Brashler: ~ ; i i METi r e nlcii~e (the gender of the definite article is changed before MET).In his dissertation (note 4 above) and in his subsequent translation in J.M. Robinson (ed), The Nag Hamnladi Library in English (Leiden, 19883), Brashler suggested reading: 'in the three hundredth (year) of the covenant'; A. Werner proposes, in Schneemelcher, NTApok5 11, 637: 'im dreihundertsten (Jahr) der Emchtung'; English translation, 705: 'in the three hundredth (year) of the foundation'; Havelaar: 'in the threehundredth of the construction'. Is J.-D. Dubois, 'Le Prkambule de 1'Apocalypse de Pierre (Nag Harnmadi VII, 70.14-20)', in Gnosticisme et nlonde helle'nistique: Actes du Colloque de Louvain-la-Neuve (11-14 mars 1980) (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982) 384-93, and the grammatical annotation by Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 54. l6 Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 73-5.

,

I

wards them. Christ used this occasion to instruct the apostle how he could inwardly transcend visible reality": And as he was saying these things, I (Peter) saw the priests and the people running toward us with stones, as if they were about to kill us. I was afraid that we were going to die1'.

Christ summoned the apostle to put his hands over his eyes and to describe what he could see. At first, Peter did not understand the instruction, for he said that he could not see anything in this way. However, when Christ asked him to do it once more, something changed. Peter reports : Fear and joy came over me, for I saw a new light brighter than the light of day. Thereupon it came down upon the Saviour19.

This experience was repeated with Peter's auditory senses. Christ asked him to listen to what the priests and the people said. Peter describes what he heard: I heard the priests as they sat with the scribes. The crowds were shouting with a loud voice (73.2-4).

When Christ insisted that he listen with his spiritual ear, Peter heard something quite different, for he said to Christ:

I

'You are glorified while you are seatedY2O.

With his physical eyes and ears Peter heard chaotic and threatening things but the inner self perceived the joyful truth about the Saviour. In this way, the apostle was prepared for what he would experience shortly later on that day.

I' Cf. U. Schoenbom, Diverbium Salutis. Literarische Struktur und theologische Ir~terztiondes gnostischen Dialogs am Beispiel der koptischen 'Apokalypse des Petrus ' (Gottingen, 1995) 110-12. l8 GApPf 72.4-8 (trans. Brashler 1996, 223). l9 GApPt 72.21-27 (apart from a few minor points I adopt Havelaar's translation). 20 GApPt 73.9-10. This statement recalls the opening lines of the text speaking about the Saviour sitting in the temple. In both cases the reference is to a spiritual temple in the divine world as well as to the earthly temple.

192

GERARD P. LU'ITIKHUIZEN

4 . Jesus' Arrest and Crucifixion The actual arrest and the crucifixion of Jesus are reported on the last pages of the text. First Christ encouraged Peter: 'Peter, come! Let us go and fulfill the will of the incorruptible Father. Behold, those who will bring judgment upon themselves are coming. They will put themselves to shame. But me they cannot touch. And you, Peter, will stand in their midst. Do not be afraid because of your cowardice. Their minds shall be closed for the Invisible One has opposed them.' When he had said these things, I saw him seemingly being seized by them (80.23-81.6). In the last sentence of this quotation, the attention is shifted from the arrest (still in the temple?) to the crucifixion scene. Curiously enough, even during the crucifixion Christ remained Peter's angelus interpres and answered the questions posed by the apostle: And I said, 'What am I seeing, 0 Lord? Is it you yourself whom they take? And are you holding on to me? Who is the one who is glad and laughing above the cross? Do they hit another one on his feet and on his hands?' The Saviour said to me, 'The one you see above the cross, glad and laughing, is the living Jesus. But the one into whose hands and feet they are driving the nails is his fleshly part (sarkikon), which is the substitute. They put to shame that which came into existence after his likeness' (...). The son of their glory, instead of my servant, they have put to shame'". An essential feature of this vision account is the distinction made between the suffering Jesus and the impassible Saviour. What is more, the two figures are related to conflicting powers. The Saviour is an agent of the incorruptible Father, whereas the human body of Jesus supposedly is a product ('the son') of the cosmic powers". Such an GApPt 81.6-23, 82.1-3. Cf. Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 102. This body 'came into existence after his likeness'. The idea that the human body was formed after a heavenly archetype by cosmic powers is elaborated in the Secret Book (Apocrypphon) of John and in other Gnostic texts. 22

interpretation implies that the wrongdoers who arrested and crucified Jesus, did not torture the Saviour but a human body. Above the cross, 'the living Jesus' laughs at their blindness. Thereupon, Peter reports, he perceived another figure: And I saw someone about to approach us who looked like him and like the one who was laughing above the cross. He was woven in holy Spirit. He was the Saviour. And there was a great ineffable light, surrounding them, and the multitude of ineffable and invisible angels, blessing them. And I saw that the one who glorifies was revealed (82.317).

After this vision of what seems to be a higher dimension of the Saviour, Christ resumed his explanations to Peter: And he said to me, 'Be strong! For you are the one to whom these mysteries have been given through revelation in order that you will know that the one they crucified is the first-born, the home of the demons, the clay vessel in which they dwell; it belongs to Elohim and to the cross that is under the law. - But he who stands near him, is the living Saviour, he who was in him before, (in) the one who was seized. And he was released. He stands joyfully, looking at those who treated him violently. They are divided among themselves. Therefore, he laughs at their inability to see. He knows that they are born blind. - So, the one who suffers will stay (behind), because the body is the substitute. - But the one who was released is my incorporeal body. - I am the intellectual spirit filled with radiant light. - The one you saw coming to me is our intellectual Pleroma, who unites the perfect light with my holy spirit' (82.17-83, 15).

Peter's visions are characterised as 'mysteries' given exclusively to himz3. In his explanations, Christ paid special attention to the temporal dwelling of the Saviour in the physical Jesus: until the arrest of Jesus, the Saviour was in him ('he was in him before'); after his 'release' from Jesus, he witnessed how 'the one staying behind' was seized and treated violently. 23

Cf. 71.8-21, where Christ says to Peter, 'from you I have made a beginning for the others whom I have called to knowledge', and 71.25-27, where Peter is reminded that he was called 'to know him (Christ) in the proper way'.

194

GERARD P. L U ~ I K H U I Z E N

Actually, the vision accounts and the subsequent interpretations refer to two different aspects of the impassible Christ. Like the physical Jesus, these higher forms were seen by Peter as more or less independent figures : 1) 'the living Jesus' or 'living Saviour', also designated by Christ as his 'servant' and his 'incorporeal body' 2) 'the intellectual Pleroma', who in Peter's vision looked like 'the living Jesus'

These two distinctions within the concept of the Saviour indicate that GApPr does not conceive of two 'natures' (one human and one divine, as in later orthodox Christology) but of three. In particular, 'the living Saviour' deserves closer examination. His position between Christ's intellectual, or pleromatic, spirit and the physical body of Jesus reminds us of the role of the soul in a trichotomous concept of reality. In this view of man and the world, the innermost centre of the human being (designated as the mind, nous, the spirit, pneuma, or also the soul, i.e. the rational part of the soul) is related to the supramundane realm of God. In contrast, the soul (or its irrational part) is, supposedly, of the same ethereal substance as the stars and the planets. In this concept, the soul mediates between the incorporeal spirit and a body composed of the four elements. Ethel-, the fine-material substance of the soul, was regarded as the fifth element (qirinta essentia) and was seen as a special kind of 'body'24. In Hellenistic and Roman times, it was thought that when the immaterial soul or spirit left the supramundane world, it was wrapped in ethereal 'clothes'. The function of this ethereal 'body' was to protect the spiritual principle, to bridge the distance between the spirit and the earthly body, and, more specifically, to serve as a vehicle (och6ma) for the spirit. In this 'body', the spirit descended to the lower world and, after the death of the eaqhly individual, returned to the world above25. 24

P. Moraux, 'Quinta essentia', in RE 47 (Suttgart 1963) 1171-1263 at 1245-56. According to the Gnostic Apocryphon of John, humans have a 'psychic body' (made of the fine-material substance of the planetary spheres) as well as a carnal body. 25 Cf. Galen, De placitis Hippocratis et Platonis VII.7.25-26: 'if we must

The cryptic designations, 'my incorporeal body' and 'my servant', that Christ used to refer to the figure who left the body of the earthly Jesus before he was arrested and later appeared to Peter above the cross, become more comprehensible if we relate them to the speculations about an ethereal soul-body and its mediating role between the spiritual and the earthly-material components of man. 5. Peter's Example

GApPt claims that the Saviour was immune to the attacks by the forces of it was not he who was tortured and humiliated but his temporal 'substitute': the human body of Jesus. This claim is also voiced in the sections dealing with the 'future' errors of other Christian groups2'. Orthodox followers of Jesus are criticised for worshipping 'a dead man128and for imposing their belief in redemption, through Jesus' death (?), on others: speak of the substance of the soul, we must say (. ..) either that it is this, as it were, luciform and ethereal body (...) or that it is an incorporeal substance, and (that) this body is its first vehicle, by means of which it establishes partnership (koindnia) with other bodies'; similar views are expressed by Philo ( Q ~ l irel-~rn~ s dill. her. 281-2), Cicero, Plutarch, and also by Patristic authors. According to Irenaeus, Adv. kael-. 1.6-7, the Valentinian Gnostics had very definite ideas about the three levels of being. Among others things, they believed that when Christ's spirit came down it was wrapped in a 'body having psychic substance'. See further H.S. Schibli, 'Origen, Didymus, and the vehicle of the soul', in R.J. Daly (ed), Origeniana Quinta (Louvain, 1992) 381-91, and A.P. Bos, The Soul and its Instrvmentaf Body (Leiden, 2003), ch. 14; cf. idem, De ziel en kaar veer-ruig (Leende, 1999) 99-116. 26 This is already alluded to in the first words addressed to Peter (GApPt 71.5-7): 'the principalities sought him but they did not find him'. 27 For this aspect of GApPt see K. Koschorke, Die Polemik der- Gnostikergegen das kirchliche Chr-istent~rrn(Leiden, 1978), and Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 193-204. 28 GApPt 74.13-15: 'they adhere to the belief in a dead mean, thinking that they wiIl become pure'; Havelaar, Copric Apocalypse, 89: 'The belief in the name of a dead man will appear to be the core of the conflict between the Petrine Gnostics and their opponents'.

196

GERARD P. L U ~ K H U I Z E N

They are the ones who suppress their brothers saying to them: 'through this our God has mercy, because salvation comes to us through this'".

The Christians in question are depicted as victims of the archontic powers : Many will accept our teaching in the beginning but turn away again in accordance with the will of the father of their erroPO,because they have done what he wanted3'.

Peter feared that in this way many of 'the living ones' would be led astray, but Christ reassured him: For a period of time determined for them in proportion to their error, they will rule over the little ones. But, after the completion of the error, the ageless (race) of immortal understanding will be renewed, and they (the little ones) will rule over their rulers32.

When the text was written, the Petrine Gnostics were still in conflict with other Christian groups and they had reasons to believe that they lived in a world dominated by cosmic rulers. They could feel encouraged by the last words addressed to Peter and by Peter's exemplary reaction: 'You. therefore. be brave and do not fear anything, for I will be with you so that none of your enemies will domineer over you. Peace be with you. Be strong! ' When he had said these things, he (Peter) came to his senses (84.6-13).

The translation of the concluding words was proposed by Alexander Bohlig and adopted by Brashler and Ha~elaar?~. I suggest that the relI9 GApPt 79.1-16; cf. 76.31-34: 'they will boast that the mystery of truth is with them alone'. 30 This seems to be a designation of the demiurge, the chief archon, who in several Gnostic texts is seen as the cause of evil andoasthe enemy of spiritual humanity. Cf. GApPt 74.29-30: 'they (nowGnostic Christians) stand in the power of the archons'. 3' GApPt 73.23-27; cf. 74.22: 'they will be ruled in a heretical manner'. 32 GApPt 80.8-16 (trans. Brashler, 1996, 239; I added 'race' between brackets). The designation of the Gnostics as 'the little ones' recalls the expression 'these little ones' used by Jesus to refer to his followers in Matthew's Gospel (10.42; 18.6,10,14). See Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 97, 152, 179f. 33 A. Bohlig, 'Zur Apokalypse des Petrus', Gottirlger Miszellen 8 (19731,

THE SUFFERING JESUS AND THE INVULNERABLE CHRIST

197

evant Coptic phrase is laden with far more meaning34: after Christ's teachings Peter 'came to himself (i.e. to his true self)'. This interpretation means that when the Saviour had completed his teachings, Peter achieved the state of perfection to which he was called before by Christ: You, too, Peter, become perfect (...) just like me, the one who has chosen you. For from you I have made a beginning for the others whom I have called to knowledge (7 1.5-21).

The Gnostic ApPr claims to contain Peter's own account of the revelations granted to him by Jesus Christ on Good Friday. The revelations pertain first and foremost to the true meaning of the things seen and events experienced by the apostle on that day. It is remarkable, and somewhat confusing, that Christ, the Saviour, is both the subject and object of the revelation. Peter saw different forms of Christ, while at the same time Christ was with him and spoke to him. Christ insisted that the suffering Jesus should not be mistaken for the divine Saviour. In Christ's explanation, the human body of Jesus was merely a temporary dwelling-place. Moreover, he repudiated this sarkikol~as the product ('the son') of quasi-glorious cosmic powers. In GApPr, the cosmic powers are the attackers and enemies of Christ and the Gnostics. As Christ disclosed in his first words addressed to Peter, 'the principalities' sought him but could not find him3'. Christ himself was fully immune to the attacks of the forces of evil. His followers could attain this level of protection if they allowed themselves to be enlightened by Christ's teaching and, accordingly, were prepared to live in this world as 'strangers' and 'children of light' (78.25-6, 83.17-9). Actually, Christ predicted that some of his followers would turn away from the truth and accused their leaders, 'the messengers of er11-3. For the use of the third person style in this interpretation of the last sentence of the text see Havelaar, Coptic Apocalypse, 68-9 and 78f. 34 aq y w n e Z P A I N Z H T ~ ~ 35 GApPt 71 5 7 ; cf. note 26 above.

198

GERARD P. LUTTIKHUIZEN

ror', of siding with his enemies (77.24ff, 80.2-6). The 'children of this age' would do what 'the father of their error' wanted them to Christ made great demands on Peter (and, through, him on the others whom he had called to knowledge3'). He frequently encouraged and reassured the apostle. Peter's fears concerned the future as well as the present. He was afraid of what might happen to Christ, and to himself, when he saw what the priests and the people wanted to do. But he also feared future oppression by the cosmic forces and the people 'in their power'38. Only gradually did the apostle overcome his fears; and through Christ's revelations he was led, finally, to full understanding. Of course, the inner transformation of Peter was meant to set an example to the Gnostic readers of this writing39. In conclusion, it has to be noted, that GApPt's interpretation of Jesus' arrest and crucifixion does not deviate substantially from what we find in some of the other early-Christian Gnostic writings. For instance, the Letter of Peter to Philip in codex VIII of Nag Hammadi contains a sermon by Peter in which the apostle first summarises the well-known account of Jesus' passion, death, and resurrection, but subsequently he says: 'My brothers, Jesus is a stranger to this suffering'40. His argument was that it was not the divine Saviour, the bringer of the Truth, who suffered but rather the Gnostics who, before his coming, had lived in darkness and were in need of Christ's redemptive message. We could also compare the Gnostic chapters of the Acts of John (99-101), where a distinction is made between the 'wooden cross in Jerusalem' and the 'cross of light' revealed to John when he fled from the crucifixion scene to the Mount of Olives. John was asked by the Saviour to scorn the 'humble' and 'unworthy' beliefs of those who assumed that he had been crucified in Jerusalem. The story ends

Cf. note 30 above. GApPt 7 1.20f. 3"ApPt 73.17-18. 39 This aspect of the GApPt is particularly highlighted in Schoenborn, Diverbium Salutis. Letter of Peter to Philip 139.13-25. 36 37

with an account of how John laughed at the people around the wooden cross. In these, and other Gnostic writings4', Christ is viewed as an 11luminator from the transcendent world. The idea that he could suffer as a physical being, is explicitly and vehemently rejected42.

4'

Cf. the Treatise of Seth, the writing that precedes GApPr in NHC VII, esp. 51.20-52.3 and 55.16-56.20: Christ laughed at the ignorance of the executioners when they crucified 'their man'. 42 See further the discussions in G. Luttikhuizen, 'The thought pattern of Gnostic mythologizers and their use of biblical traditions', in J.D. Turner and A. McGuire (eds), The Nag Hammadi Library after Fifry Years (Leiden 1997) 89-101 at 90-93; idem, 'A Gnostic reading of the Acts of John', in J.N. Bremmer (ed), Tile Apocryplzal Acts of John (Louvain 1995) 119-52 at 127-47. I thank dr. A. Hilhorst for his critical comments and for several valuable suggestions.

XIII. Bibliography of the Apocalypse of Peter

The Greek Apocaljpse of Peter Bouriant, U., 'Fragments du texte grec du livre d ' ~ n o c het de quelques Ccrits attribuCs B saint Pierre', Me'moires publikes par les Memhres de la Missiorl Arche'ologiq~reFratlgaise alr Cair-e IX.1 (Paris, 1892: editio princeps) 142-7; A. Lods, photogravures of the manuscript, ibidem, IX.3 (1893) 224-8 Buchholz, D.D., Yolrr Eyes Will Be Opened: A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse of Peter (Atlanta. 1988) Gebhardt, 0. von, Das E~rangeliirnilitid die Apokaljpse des Petivs (Leipzig, 1893) James, M.R., 'A New Text of the Apocalypse of Peter I-111', JTS 12 (191 1) 36-54 (with addenda at p. 157). 362-83 (the actual new text at 367-9), 573-83 , 'The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 32 (1931) 270-9 Preuschen. E., Alltilegor71ena (Giessen, 1905') 84-8 (with patristic citations) Etkiopic Buchholz, Your Eyes Will Be Opened GrCbaut, S., 'LittCrature Cthiopienne pseudo-clCmentine. Texte et traduction du trait6 "La seconde venue du Christ et la rCsurrection des morts",' Revire de I'Orienr Chrf'tien 15 (1910) 198-214, 307-23 (text), 425-39 (translation)

Sallmann, K. (ed), Handbuch der lateinischen Literatur der Antike, N , Die Liter-atur des Umbrvchs: Vorz den I-on~ischelizur christlichen Literal

I am grateful to Ton Hilhorst for suggestions and corrections.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

20 1

tur: 117 bis 284 n. Chr. (Munich, 1997) 406 (on early Latin translation) Translations Bauckham, R., in F. Bovon and P. Geoltrain (eds), ~ c r i t sapoctyplzes chre'tiens I (Paris, 1997) 745-74 Duensing, H., 'Ein Stiicke der urchristlichen Petmsapokalypse enthaltender Traktat der athiopischen pseudoclementinischen Literatur', ZNW 14 (1913) 65-78 (with philological notes) Elliott, J.K., The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993) 593-615 Erbetta, M., Gli Apocri' del Nuovo Testamento Ill (Torino, 1966) 209-33 James, M.R., The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1953) 505-24 Klijn, A.F.J. (ed), Apokr-iefen van her Nieuwe Testament, 2 vols (Kampen, 1984-85) 11.205-9 -, Apocriefe openharingen, orakels en brieven. Buitenhijhelse aanl~ullingen op het Nieuwe Testament (Baarn, 2001) 4 1-56 Marrassini, P., 'L'Apocalisse di Pietro', in Y. Beyene et a/. (eds), Etiopia e oltre (Naples, 1994) 17 1-232 Mingana, A., Woodhrooke studies: Christian documents in Syriac, Arabic, and Garskuni, 7 vols (Cambridge, 1927-34) I11 (1931): Vision of Tlzeophilus. Apocalypse of Peter Moraldi, L., Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento I1 (Torino, 1971) 1803-48 Preuschen, Antilegometfa, 188-92 Schneemelcher, NTA 11, 101-51 Starowieyski, M. (ed), Apokr-yfi Nowego Testanzerzta I n (Cracow, 2000) 225-41 Apocalypse of Peter Bauckham, R., 'The Two Fig Tree Parables in the Apocalypse of Peter', JBL 104 (1985) 269-87 -, 'The Apocalypse of Peter: An Account of Research', ANRW 11.25.6 (Berlin, 1988) 4712-50. , 'The Conflict of Justice and Mercy: Attitudes to the Damned in Apocalyptic Literature', Apocrypha 1 (1990) 181-96, repr. in The Fate of the Dead, 132-48 -, 'The Apocalypse of Peter: A Jewish Christian Apocalypse from the Time of Bar Kokhba', Apocr:yplra 5 (1994) 7-1 11, repr. in The Fate of the Dead, 160-258 -, 'A Quotation from 4Q Second Ezekiel in the Apocalypse of Peter', Revue de Qunlran 59 (1992) 437-46, repr, in The Fare of the Dead, 259-68 -, 'The Martyrdom of Peter in Early Christian Literature', ANRW 11.26.1 (Berlin, 1992) 539-95 -, The Fate of the Dead (Leiden, 1998)

202

BREMMER

Berger, K., 'Unfehlbare Offenbarung. Petrus in der gnostischen und apokalyptischen Offenbarungsliteratur', in Korttinuitat und Einheit, Festsclzrift F. Mussner (Freiburg, 1981) 261-326 Cowley, R., 'The Ethiopic Work Which Is Believed to Contain Material of the Ancient Greek Apocalypse of Peter', JTS 36 (1985) 151-3 Dieterich, A., Nehyia (Leipzig, 1893, 19132) Edsman, C.M., Le baptgme de feu (Uppsala, 1940) 53-63 Gray, P., 'Abortion, Infanticide, and the Social Rhetoric of the Apocalypse of Peter', JECS 9 (2001) 313-37 Hamack, A., BI-uchstiicke des Evangeliums ~rndder Apokalypse des Petrus (Leipzig, 1893) , Die Petrusapokalypse in der abendlandiscl~ettKirche (Leipzig, 1895) Hams, J.R., 'The Odes of Solomon and the Apocalypse of Peter', E.rpository Times 42 (1930) 21-2 Hills, J.V., 'Parables, Pretenders and Prophecies: Translation and Interpretation in the Apocalypse of Peter', Revue Biblique 98 (1991) 560-73 Himmelfarb, M., Tours of Hell: An Apocalyptic Fornt in Jewish and Christian Literature (Philadelphia, 1983) James, M.R., 'The Revelation of Peter: A lecture on the newly recovered fragment', in J.A. Robinson and M.R. James (eds), The Gospel Accordin,? to Peter and the Revelation to Peter-: Two lectures on the newly recovered,fr-agments together with the Greek texts (London, 1892) 37-82 -, 'The Rediscovery of the Apocalypse of Peter', The Church Quarterly re vie^^, April 1915, 1-37 Kraus, T.J., 'Acheron and Elysion: Anmerkungen im Hinblick auf deren Venvendung auch im christlichen Kontext', Mnentosyrie 46 (2003) 145-64 -, 'Die griechische Petrus-Apokalypse und ihre Relation zu ausgewahlten ~berlieferun~stragem apokalyptischer Stoffe', Apoctypha 14 (2003) Marnorstein, A., 'Jiidische Parallelen zur Petrusapokalypse', ZNW 10 (1909) 297-300 Norelli, E., 'Situation des apocryphes pktriniens', Apoctypha 2 (1991) 31-83 Priimm, K., 'De genuino apocalypsis Petri textu, examen testium iam notorum et novi fragmenti Raineriani', Biblica 10 (1929) 62-80 Quispel, G., and R.M. Grant, 'Note on the Petrine Apocrypha', VigChris 6 (1952) 31-2, repr. in R.M. Grant, Christian Beginnin~s:Apocalypse to History (London, 1983) Rodriguez, M., 'Tres apdcrifos non gndsticos sobre Pedro (el Apocalipsis de Pedro, el Evangelio de Pedro y 10s Hechos de Pedro', in R. Aguirre Monasterio (ed), Pedro en la Icqlesiaprimitiva (Estella, 1991) 141-84 Schmidt, D.H., The Peter Writings: Their Redactol-s and Their Relationships (Diss. Northwestern University. Evanston, Ill., 1972) Spitta, F., 'Die Petrusapokalypse und der zweite Petrusbrief', ZNW 12 ( 1911) 237-42

*

BIBLIOGRAPHY

203

Tardieu, M., 'HCrCsiographie de I'Apocalypse de Pierre. Histoire et conscience historique dans les civilisations du Proche Orient ancien', Cahiers du Centre d' ~ t u d e du s Proche-Orient Ancien 5 (1991) 33-9

Index of Names, Subjects and Passages

Abel96 Abraham 74, 116 Acheron/Acherusia(n Lake) 6, 9-10, 79-80, 85-86, 91-107, 153 Achilles Tatius 105 Acts of Andrew 119 Acts of John 90: 119; 99-101: 198 Acts of Paul and Thecla 28-29: 32, 101, 150 Acts of Peter 6, 7,12: 56; 14: 119; 38: 115 Acts of Thomas 51-58,55-57: 178; 80, 129, 149: 119 Adam 93-94, 96-97, 102; Jewish legends 92 Aelius Theon, Progymnasmata 99.2: 108 Aftemelouchos 9 afterlife 11 Akhmim 16-18 Akiba 58-62 Alcinous, Didasc. 32.4: 135 Alexandria 8, 30 Ambrose, In Luc. 8.14: 135 Antichrist 54 Apocalypse of Abraham 31.4: 131 Apocalypse of Baruch 9 Apocalypse of Elias 150 Apocalypse of EIijalz 5.27-8: 131 ; 5.27-9: 32; 13.10-14.9, 18.1-20.15,23.110, 23.1 1-24.2: 179 Apocalypse of James 95 Apocalypse of Mary 9 Apocalypse of Moses 92-93, 104, 107; 7, 21-25, 27,' 32, 35: 102; 37.3: 10, 154; 40.1-2: 96 Apocalypse of Paul 16: 8; 34: 9 Apocalypse of Paul (Coptic version) 17: 103; 22: 102; 22-3: 9, 154 Apocalypse of Pal11 (Greek version) 16: 9; 17: 103; 22: 93; 34: 9; date: 92, 183 Apocalypse of Paul (Latin version) 17: 103: 22: 93, 96, 102; 23: 102-3 Apocalypse of Peter 1-3: 62; 1-20: 11 1; 1.1: 75; 1.1-3: 54-5; 1.5-7: 179; 1.6-7: 176; 2: 56; 2.7-13: 179; 3-6: 72; 3: 56; 4-6: 176; 5: 30; 5.4-5:

INDEX

205

178; 5.8-6.5: 182; 6.1-2: 182; 6.3: 179; 7-11: 61; 7-12: 72, 75; 7.2: 72; 7.3-4: 111; 7.3: 72; 7.5-6.7.7-8,7.9-11: 111; 7.10: 29, 138, 140; 7.12: 71; 8.1-4: 112; 8.4: 176; 8.7: 180; 8.8-9: 176; 8.10: 176, 180; 9.1-2: 112; 9.2: 71-73; 9.2-4: 7; 9.3: 71-73, 112; 9.4: 71, 74, 112; 9.5-7, 10.1, 10.2-4, 10.5-6: 112; 10.5: 71,75; 10.6-7: 179; 10.7: 112; 12.4-7: 182; 12.5-6: 179; 13: 30-1, 102; 13-14: 72; 13.1: 72; 13.1-2: 179; 14: 92, 100; 14.1: 75; 14.1-3: 176, 179; 14.2-5: 179; 15-7: 75; 15-17: 75-76; 15-20: 78; 15-27: 15; 15.1: 75-76; 15.2-7: 77; 16.2-4: 76;16.5: 74; 16.9: 74, 77; 17: 176; 17.1: 73; 20: 29; 20.34: 55; 22: 56, 111; 23: 4, 12, 111; 24: 12, 109, 152; 24a,b: 111; 25: 4,29, 111, 121, 152; 26: 28, 112; 27: 4,29, 112; 28: 56, 112; 29: 112; 30: 112; 31: 12, 112; 31-34: 111; 32: 4, 112, 152; 33: 28, 29; 33a: 112; 33b: 112; 34: 56, 112, 117, 152; abortion 121; and Antioch 30; Arabic 131 ; baptism of sinners 91-107; and Bar Kochba 29,57-59.61-65,6771, 73-74, 77, 174; Bodleian fragment 35; castration in 121; childbirth in 121; Egyptian origin 14, 75, 71 ; finding 17-19: 17; and Gospel of Perer 158; grotesque body in 108-126; hell in 114-23; infanticide in 121; justice in 127-57; origin of text 75-7; and Palestine 30; Palestinian origin 75; and Paradise 83; and 2 Perer 54; Rainer fragment 35, 83-88, 107; reception in ancient Christianity 174-86; and Rome 30; and the Sinlilit~tdes76; sinslsinners and punishment 71-73, 110-14; and temple 77 Apocalypse of Peter (Ethiopic) 6; 1: 57,58; 1-2: 59,64, 111; 2: 59,63,65, 68, 74, 124; 2.7: 64-66; 2.8: 29, 64, 66, 69; 2.8-9: 67; 2.8-10: 66; 2.8b: 65; 2.9: 66; 2.10: 68-70; 2.10-11, 13: 64, 66; 2.11: 70, 124; 2.12: 68-69; 3: 137-8, 142, 147, 152-3; 3-6: 111; 3.2: 152; 3.3: 138; 3.4: 138, 147; 3.4b, 3.5-6: 124; 3.5: 138; 3.7: 31, 139; 4.1: 162; 4.2: 162-3; 4.5,4.6: 162; 4.7: 161 ; 4.7-8: 159, 162; 4.7b: 158; 4 . 7 ~ :15960; 4.7~-8a:160; 4.7-9: 158-9, 163; 4.8: 160-1, 167-8; 4.8b: 160; 4 . 8 ~ 162; : 4.9: 161-3; 4.9a: 160, 162; 4.10-1: 124; 4.12: 162-3; 4.13: 162; 5: 30; 6: 84; 6.6, 6.9: 152; 7: 56; 7-13, 7.1-2, 7.3-4, 7.5-6, 7.78: 111; 7.7: 109; 7.8: 152, 155; 7.9-11: 111; 7.10: 29; 7.11: 141, 152, 155; 8: 8; 8.3-4: 138, 141; 8.5-7: 138; 8.5-10: 112, 121; 8.6-7: 141; 8.9: 152; 8.10: 28, 152; 9.1: 29; 9.1-2: 112; 9.3: 112; 9.4: 73, 112; 9.5-7: 112; 10: 55, 84; 10.1: 112; 10.2-4: 112; 10.3: 152; 10.5: 28, 29; 10.5-6: 112; 10.6-7: 152; 10.7: 112, 153; 11: 64; 11.4: 138, 140, 155; 11.6-7, 11.8-9: 113; 11.9: 152; 12.1-3, 12.4-7: 113; 13: 6, 8, 31, 153-4; 13.2: 32, 138, 141, 143; 13.3: 152; 13.6: 141, 155; 14: 6, 78-79, 81, 83, 106, 150, 153; 14-17: 111 ; 14.1-3: 31, 32; 14.4: 30; 15-16: 61; 15-17: 29, 31; 16.5: 29, 158; 16.6: 29; 16.8-9: 65; 16.917.1: 168; 17.1, 17.2: 169; 17.2-6: 168, 172; 17.3-6: 77; 17.4: 170-1; 17.4a: 158; 17.5: 173; 17.5b: 158; 17.6: 172; 20: 30; 23, 24a, 24b,

INDEX

25: 111; 26,27,28,29,30: 112; 31: 12, 112; 32,33a, 34: 112; origin of text 64; temple in 168; vengeance 152-3 Apocalypse of Peter (Gnostic) 187-99;; 70.13-20: 189; 70.15-16: 190; 71.5-7: 195, 197; 71.5-21: 197; 71.20f.: 198; 71.25-27: 193; 72.4-8, 72.21-27, 73.2-4, 73.9-10: 191; 73.17-18: 198; 73.23-27: 196; 74.1315: 195; 74.22: 196; 74.29-30: 196; 76.31-34: 188, 196; 77.24ff.: 198; 78.25-6: 197; 79.1-16: 196; 80.2-6: 198; 80.8-16: 196; 81.6-23, 82.1-3: 192; 82.17-83, 15: 193; 83.17-9: 197; date of origin 188-9; literary setting 189-90; location 189-90 Apocalypse of Thornas 184 Apuleius 3 Aristophanes 13, 119-20; Frogs 145-8: 118; 145-51, 273: 12-3; Gerytades fr. 146.13: 118 Aristotle, Politics 1341: 108; Rh. 1386b34-1387a2: 134 Arnobius, 2.14: 104 Attis 120 Augustine, De Chitate Dei 21.18: 100; 21.18.1: 33; 22.22: 131; EE 1233b24-5: 140; Enar. in Ps. 108.20: 135; Enchiridion 97; 94.24: 131; Rh. 1385b13ff., 1386b14-5: 140 Bacchic mysteries 13 Balaam 53 Banias 76 Bardaisan 105 3 Barrtck 10.2: 9 Bauckham, R. 6, 14,29 Bayle, CEuvres Div. 111, p.863: 151 Beliar 173 Bellmine, R., De aeterna felicitate Sanctorum IV.2: 131 Bernardus of Claimaux 117 Bible: Gen 3: 102; 9.6: 113; 27.22: 60; Ex 21.23-25: 113; Lev 24.20: 113: Num 22-25: 53; 24.17: 58-59, 61; 31.8: 53; Deut 13.2-4: 69; 13.2-6: 53, 57; 18.20-22: 53, 57; 19.19: 113; Josh 13.22: 53; 1 Sam 28: 80; Job 10.21, 26.5: 115; Ps 2.6-7: 76; 24: 158, 168-73; 24.3: 169; 24.4: 171; 24.4-6: 169; 24.6: 169-71; 24.7-10: 170; 24.7a, 9a: 172-3; 88.10, 94.17: 115; 104.1-2: 82; Sorzg 5.10-14: 61; 23.30: 131; Eccl 9.10: 115; Is 14.10-1, 16-7, 26.14: 115; Jer 14.14: 53; 23.13: 53, 26.18: 61; Ezek 1.28: 82; 6.2-3, 13.2, 17-18, 21.7-8, 14: 166; 28.14: 76; 28.21-22, 29.2-3, 30.2: 166; 32.21: 115; 34.2, 35.2-3: 166; 37: 158-73; 37.1-14: 159-60, 166; 37.1, 37.3: 162; 3 7 . 3 ~ 159; : 37.4: 160, 162; 37.4b: 159; 37.5: 162; 37.6: 160, 165; 37.7: 159, 162, 165,167; 37.8: 159, 166; 37.9-10: 166; 37.11: 162-3; 37.12-14, 37.12: 162;

INDEX

207

38.2-3, 39.1: 166; Dan 10-12, 11: 70; 11.41: 66; 12.3: 82; Nah 3.7: 69; Zech 8.4-5: 61; 13.9: 84; Ma1 2.3: 120; Mt 15; 5.6: 57; 5.10: 29; 5.19: 56; 5.29-30: 114; 5.38ff.: 131; 5.44: 100, 154; 5.44-8: 155; 5.45: 44; 7.15-20, 21-23: 53, 56; 10.42: 196; 11.25-36: 59; 12.32: 84; 16: 76; 16.13: 75; 16.23: 73; 17: 73, 75; 17.4, 17.4-8, 17.5: 73; 17.5b: 169; 17.22: 75; 18.6, 10, 14: 196; 24: 111; 24.3: 75; 24.4-5: 59; 24.9: 66; 24.10: 66-67; 24.11,24: 54; 24.24: 64, 66, 69; 24.32-6: 123; 25.1-13: 181; 25.31-46: 29; 26.24: 138; 27.59: 96; 28.16: 75; Mk9.2-13: 111; 13.22: 54; 13.28-9: 123; 14.21: 124, 138; Lk 13.6-8: 123; 16.19-31: 130; 21.29-31: 123; 22.3: 115; 23.53: 96; John 5.22: 44; 19.40: 96; 20.24: 108; Acts 1.1-11: 169; 1.12: 76; 1.18: 115; 7.60: 100, 154; 9.37: 95; Rom 1.23: 28; ICor 15.35-49: 124; Gal 4.19, 5.19, 5.7: 120; Heb 9.11: 73; 12.23: 103; Jam 181; 1.2, 12: 57; 2 Peter 158, 181; 1.18: 75-76; 2.1: 53; 2.1-1-2: 54; 2.2: 73; 1 John 2.22: 68; 1 and 2 John 68; 2 and 3 John 181; Jude 181; Rev 30, 128; 13.11-17, 16.13, 19.20, 20.10: 54, 59; 21.3: 73; 21.14-15: 125 Bonaventure 130 Book of Enoch 1 , 4 Book of Jubilees 19 Book of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, by Bartholomew the Apostle 91, 95, 105-7; fol. 20a-20b: 106; 46.3: 10 Book of Thomas the Contender 8 Book of Watchers 6, 76 horboros 118 Bucholz, D.D. 3 1-3, 42 Camus, A. 157 Caesarea Philippi 75 Cicero, T~isc.Disp. 4.20: 135 confessors 101, 107 Canon Muratori 30,52 Cavallo, G. 16, 20, 23 1 Clem. 46.7-8: 147 Clement of Alexandria 28; Eclogue Propheticae 41: 28, 121, 176, 180; 48: 9, 28, 121, 176, 180; 49: 121, 176; Stromata 14: 104 Cocytus 80, 85, 98-9 Codex Claromontanus 183 crucifixion 192-5 Cybele 120 Cyprian, Ad Demetr. 30.2; Adversos aleatores 8: 179; De laude martyrii 19-21: 178; Ep. 27.1, 15.4, 20.1: 107 Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 15.20, 15, 21 : 182

INDEX

Dan 76 danse macabre 117 Dante 127 David 171 Dead Sea Scrolls: IQpHah X 9: 68; 4QpPs a 126: 68; lQHa XI1 17: 68; 4Q339: 69; 4Q169: 69; 4Q38.5: 163, 167; 4Qpseudo-Ezekiel: 164; 4Q385, frg.2: 164-8; 4Q385.5.8: 165; 4Q386, frg. 1, col.1: 164-8; 49388, frg. 8: 164-8; 4QSecond Ezekiel: 166, 168 Didache 55 Didimon 108-9 Diels, H. 2 Dieterich, A. 5-7, 10, 12, 55, 78 Diogenes Laertius 6.51 and 68: 108 Dionysiac mysteries 1 1 Edessa 8 Edom 60 Eleusinian mysteries 5 Eleusis 12-4 Elijah 30, 64, 70, 73-74, 77, 113 Elysian fields 6, 9-10, 79, 154; in Rome 8 1 Encon1ilrnl on Saint John the Baptist by Saint John Chrysostonz 95 Enoch 64, 70, 76-77 I Erioch 16, 20. 23-5; 5.7: 82; 6-16: 76; 10.8: 82; 13-16: 77; 14.20: 82; 17-19: 76; 17: 94; 22: 97; 32: 76; 106: 77; 108.14-5: 131 Ephraim 69 Epictetus, Diatr. 2.16.45: 135 Epistlrla Apostolor~m~ 150, 175; 16, 26, 39: 176; 40: 33; 51: 176 Epistle of Barnabas 177, 183 Epistle of Jude 177 Esau 60 eschatia 120 Ethiopic translation of Daniel 67 Eusebius 67; Chronicle 68, 70; Hist. eccl. 3.3.1-2: 180; 3.25.1-3, 3.25.4-6: 181; 4.6, 4.8.3ff.: 68; 4.8.4: 58; 5.2.5: 100-101; 6.14.1: 177; 7.22.9: 96; Or. Const. 9: 104; Praep. elt. 11.38: 104 Eve 102 4 Ezra 19; 7.36-8: 131 Ezrael 29. 140 Falconilla 32, 101, 150 false messiahs 68

INDEX

false prophet 53, 68, 70 fate 106 flute 108 Foucault, M. 149 Francis de Sales, De Isamour de Dieu IX.8: 131 Galen, De placitis Hippocratis et Platonis VII.7.25-26: 194 Galilee 75, 77 galloi 120 Ginzberg, L. 94-5 Good Friday 190. 197 Gospel of Peter 1, 16, 95; 6.24: 96; anti-Jewish 28 Gospel of tlw Hebrvws 183 Graf, F. 12 Gregory of Nazianzus 97; Oratio 40.1 1: 96 Gregory the Great, Horn. 40.291-301: 131 Grenfell, B.P. 16 grotesque, concept of 109 Hades 6, 12-3, 116, 125 Hadrian 62 Hamack, A. von 1-2, 4, 30 Heavenly Temple in ApPt 73-74 hell 120-1, 125 Heracles 14 Herlequin 121-2 Hermas vis. 4.2.6: 147 Hermetica 8 Herod 27 Herodotus 9.92: 80 Hieronymus, ad Rlrfirurnz 3.3 1: 58 Himmelfarb, M. 6-7, 9-10, 14 Hippolytus, 017the Uni\~erse178; Ref~rtatio10.34.2: 178 Homer, Odyssey 10.513-5, 12.4, 24.11-4, 24.12: 80; 10.513: 97 Homily on the Parable of the Ten Virgins 181 homosexuals 112 Horace, Sat. 1.4.78-9: 135 Hunt. A.S. 16 Imperial cult 30 impostor 70 inscriptions: I Delos 290: 9; SEG 30.93: 9; 38.1837: 8; 44.1279: 8

210

INDEX

Irenaeus, Adv. haer. 1.5-7: 195 Isaac 74 Isaiah fragment 13 ius talionis 144 Jabne 60 Jacob 74, 17 1 James, M.R. 32-3, 35, 98, 150 Jerome, De viris illusrribus 1.5: 181; 83: 179; Horn. in LC 16.26: 131 Jesus Christ 144, 147-8, 187-99 John Chrysostomos, In 2 Cor. 130 Josephus, Ant. 18.85-87, 20.97-98, 20.167-7 1, 20.167-68, 20.188: 69; 20.169-71: 70; JW 20.261-263: 70; 2.264: 68; 2.259-63, 2.283-87, 7.437-50: 69; 6.285: 70 Judas 114 Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 31: 71 ; 31.6: 58, 67, 74 katabaseis 7, 13-4 Klostermann, E. 2 Lazarus 116, 130 Letter of Peter to Philip 139.13-25: 198 Levi 76-77 lex talionis 113 List of the Sixty Books 183 Livy 8.24: 97 Lucian 117-18, Menippus 115; 11-8: 121; 12, 16, 17: 116; True S t o ~ y1.302.2, 1.33-4 and 1.39: 125; 2.25-26 and 31: 110; 2.30: 118 Lucuas 7 1 Luther 120 Macarius Magnes, Apocriticus 4: 178; 4.6,4.7: 177; 16: 178 Maehler, H. 16, 20, 23 Marcellus Empiricus, De medicamentis 8 martyrdom 66-68 Martyrdom of Julian of Anazarbus 23-5 martyrs 101; intercession of 107 Maspero, G. 17 Messiah 73, 168-9 Methodius of Olympus 197, Synzp. 2.6: 9, 28, 180 Michael 96, 103, 105 Midrash Leqak Tob 130a: 172

INDEX

mimirs 119 mire 12 Moses 30, 73-4, 77, 113 Mount Hermon 75-6 Mount of Olives 76 Mount Zion 75-6 mud 13 Muratorian CanonFragment 181 ; 71-2: 175 Musaeus 13 Nero 30; Domus Aurea 109 Nietzsche 127-30, 146 Noah 77 Norden, E. 2-4 Omont, H. 16 Oracula Sibyllina 86,91; 11: 86, 100, 104, 107, 175; 11. 194-338: 159; 3308: 85,98, 150; 331: 151-2; 335: 100; 339-41: 100; and Apocalypse of Peter 34 Ordericus Vitalis, Ecclesiastical History 8.17: 121 Origen. Mart 30: 101 Origenists 27 Orpheus 13, 81 Orphism 1-14. 82; Gold Leaves: 10 Pantagmel 125-26 papyri: Detveni papyrus 10; P. Berlin mu. 8502: 25; PGM IV.2335: 8; P.Lotid. 3.1012: 21; P. Miinch. 1.1: 21; 1.7: 21; 1.14: 21; P. Oxy. 63.4365: 19 paradise 86 Pascal, PI-ovincialesIX: 13 1 Passior~of Andrew 13, 23: 119 Patriarchs 30 Paul 103-104 Paul of Tamma, Cell 92, 103-104, 107; 1-2: 103; 2: 104 Periander 80 Peter 3 1, 76, 95, 138-9, 144, 148, 189-99 Petrus Lombardus, Sent. IV, 50.7: 131 Philo, Qiris I-erum div. her. 281-2: 195 Pilate 27 Plato, Gorgias 526b-c: 153; Plzaedo 86, 99, 102; 96C: 12; 1l le-14c: 97; 112e-13a: 80, 112e-14b: 153; 82; 113a5-14c9: 104; 113d-e: 84,97-8;

212

INDEX

113e-14b: 85, 98; 114a-b: 86; 114b-c: 97; 114d: 107; Philebus 134; 48a ff.: 132; 50b: 133; Protagoras 324a-b: 153; Republic 363D: 13; 399d: 108 Plautus 119; Stichus 207ff.: 135 Plutarch 3; De Herod. malign. 15: 135 Porphyry, Against the Christians 177-8 Poseidon 9 prayers for deceased sinners 32 Preuschen, E. 2 Priestertrug 3 purgatory 84 Pyriphlegethon 80, 85, 98-99 Pythagoreanism 3, 7, 11 Rabelais, F. 118-20, 125 Reitzenstein, R. 3 Religionsgeschichtliche Schule 2-3, 5 river of fire 94-95 Rosenstiehl, J.-M. 9 Sacrarnentary of Gellone 2895: 96 salvation 153 Sanders, H.A. 16 Satan 173 scatology 120 Scheler, M. 146, 156 Secret Book of John 189, 192 Seneca, De ir-a 3.5.5: 135 Sheol 115 sins, remission 101 Siophanes 105 Socrates 107 Solomon 171 Sozomen 75, Church History 7.19: 182 Strabo 1.26, 5.243-5, 6.256, 7.324: 97 Stichometry of Nicephorus 183 Suetonius, Tiberius 44: 109 Styx 105 Tabitha 95 Talmud, Ber- 61b: 62; j.Taan 4,7 and 68d: 60 Targum Psalm 24.7-10: 172