Gnosis and Egyptian Christianity 11:20 - 13:00 Friday, 23rd August, 2019 Room 8 Presentation type Short Communications

236 “THEO 001: Ptolemy’s Introduction to Biblical Interpretation” tarmo toom John Leland Center, Arlington, VA, USA. Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA

Abstract

In his Epistula ad Floram, Ptolemy’s either proposed or used several hermeneutical principles which eventually became the accepted exegetical devices in Christian exegesis. The contention of this paper is not that that larger church necessarily learned certain interpretative principles through Ptolemy’s letter, but rather that this letter is among the first that we know of to highlight these interpretative principles. The question asked is, “What does Ptolemy’s Epistula ad Floram contribute to the developing tradition of biblical interpretation?” The paper highlights the following principles:

1. One’s doctrine of determines one’s approach to the Word of God. 2. Prosopological exegesis helps to handle texts which seem “unfitting” for God. 3. Prosopological exegesis helps to discern whether a text has to be taken on a literal or figurative level. 4. The criterion in the light of which one is supposed to read the is God’s self- in Jesus Christ. 5. One of the guarantees of adequate interpretation of Scripture is the apostolic succession. 6. Figurative interpretation is a necessary device for taking the Hebrew Scriptures as Christian Scripture.

Brief bibliography: Le Boulluec, “The Bible in Use among the Marginally Orthodox in the Second and Third Centuries,” 1997, 197- 216. Markschies, “New Research on Ptolemaeus Gnosticus,” 2000, 225-54. Norelli, “Le Décalogue dans la Lettre de Ptolémée à Flora,” 2008, 107-76. Löhr, “La doctrine de Dieu dans la Lettre á Flora de Ptolémée,” 1995, 177-91. O’Brien, The in Ancient Thought, 2015. 548 Excerpts from Theodotus: Social Significance of Apostolic Identity and Boundaries

Robert Williams B. H. Carroll Theological Institute, Las Colinas, USA

Abstract

In the late second century, Clement of recorded texts from Theodotus and eastern Valentinians, accompanied by his critical responses, in Excerpts from Theodotus.[1] Scholars have explored Clement’s work to analyze his reservations toward perceived rivals and to gain perspective on eastern Valentinian thought. This study furthers preceding research by determining the social construction of the Valentinian groups reflected by the Excerpts. They imply identity markers for these groups and boundaries constructed vis-à-vis rival groups, thereby distinguishing the Valentinians. Claiming authority on apostolic succession from Paul, they based their teaching on the ‘apostles’, mainly Paul. Ritual practices, informed by Pauline understanding of salvation, enriched their experience with God. Einar Thomassen has proposed three ‘dimensions’ in Valentinian Christianity: salvation history, ritual, and protology. The Excerpts evinces symbiosis between the first two, building on the implied foundation of the third.[2] The Valentinians saw themselves as undergoing spiritual renewal, experiencing a more profound unity with God than those groups from whom they differentiated themselves.

1. The Greek text of the Excerpts is based on Clemens Alexandrinus III. Stromata Buch VII und VIII, Excerpta ex Theodoto, Eclogae propheticae, Quis dives salvetur, Fragmente, eds. Otto Stählin, Ludwig Früchtel, and Ursula Treu, GCS 17 (Berlin, 1970), Clément d’Alexandrie: Extraits de Théodote, ed. Franҫois Sagnard, SC 3 (Paris, 1948), and The Excerpta ex Theodoto of Clement of Alexandria, ed. Robert Pierce Casey, SD 1 (London, 1934). 2. The Spiritual Seed: The Church of the ‘Valentinians’, NHMS 60 (Leiden/Boston, 2006), 133-34. 686 The Theodotus of Clement of Alexandria was not a Valentinian? Analysis of 'Excerpts from Theodotus' 1-3.

Giuliano Chiapparini Catholic University, Milan, Italy

Abstract

The first three chapters of the so-called 'Excerpts from Theodotus' make up the first of the 13 fragments that are recognizable within this opusculum by Clement of Alexandria based on the indications of the ms. Laurentianus 5.3. As in the other fragments, Clement summarizes and sometimes quotes anonymous Valentinian sources. In Fragment 1, concerning the exegesis of Luke 23:46, the summary extends from Exc. 1.1 and Exc. 2.2, but it includes a brief literal quote (Exc. 1.3) of a particular Valentinian source ('Source of the We'). Only at the end does Clement illustrate his doctrine (Exc. 3,1-2). Scholars usually think that the author of the gnostic source of Exc. 1-3 and most of the Excerpta is Theodotus. In actual fact, this attribution is fairly reckless, because it is based only on the title of the collection, which is understood incorrectly, and on only five marginal citations of the name of Theodotus. In Fragment 1 the name of Theodotus is absent, but it is usually implied as the subject of an anonymous 'he says' (Exc. 1,1b), based on the comparison with Exc. 25-26 where the name of Theodotus appears. The two passages are coherent from the doctrinal point of view and most probably they are derived from the same Valentinian source, as Clement himself says (Exc. 2.1 and 25.1). But the analysis of the way in which the name of Theodotus is quoted reveals that he must be distinguished from the guiding source and that he serves only as a comparison.