A Missing Martyr
with Eusebius and Victorinus. Antipas can not be found in the Church History of Eusebius or in the Commentary of Victorinus. The missing stuff is adding up. Can it be explained? Has any one tried to? There is reasonable explanation. They were both looking at copy of the Apocalypse that didn’t have Antipas, the churches, or Jesus. They just had the Lamb.
A Famous Clue
that often goes unnoticed. What the early fathers of the Church wrote has been extensively studied but what has been overlooked is what the early fathers overlooked. A good example of this is Eusebius who was obsessed with martyrs didn’t mention Antipas in Chuch History. Martyrs from Pergamus are not missing, Carpus and Papylus, and a woman named Agathonice are mentioned as martyrs in Pergamus but not Antipas. Who has tried to explain this?
Home 7
A Clue
that there is more than one writer of the Apocalypse. John is told to eat the little book and then is told he must prophesy again. It could be John the Apostle eating the little book written by John the Baptist. The Apostle would add Jesus, Antipas, and the seven churches.
A Strange Beginning
in the Apocalypse. Why is John mentioned three times? Has anyone addressed this in a reasonable way? Could they actually be three different people all named John? Victorinus and Eusebius gives us reason to believe that. Victorinus in his commentary doesn’t mention Antipas or the seven churches. He does mention the seven churches Paul wrote to. Eusebius doesn’t mention Antipas. He does mention six of the seven churches but doesn’t associate them with the Apocalypse. Both may be looking at the first version written by John the Baptist.
Home 14
A Missing Martyr
in the Church History by Eusebius. Martyrs from Pergamus are not missing. Carpus and Papylus, and a woman named Agathonice are mentioned as martyrs in Pergamus but not Antipas. Victorinus doesn’t mention Antipas or the seven churches. Eusebius mentions six of the seven churches but never associates them with the Apocalypse. There is a reasonable explanation for this. Their copy did not have them. The first version written by John the Baptist.
A Strange Introduction
that doesn’t get enough attention. Combine this with John being told to “prophesy again” after eating the little book. Is there a record of him prophesying again? Yes but the record of John prophesying the first time is missing except for a few clues. The dog that didn’t bark. Eusebius and Victorinus did not mention Antipas or the seven churches. Were they looking at the first Apocalypse written by John the Baptist?
A Glaring Omission
in the History of the Church by Eusebius that has not been addressed by people who should know. Eusebius doesn’t mention Antipas in his Church History but the word ‘martyr’ can be found 355 times. He does mention Carpus and Papylus, two martyrs of Pergamus but he does not mention Antipas. He mentions six of the seven churches but never associates them with the Apocalypse.
Watch for more pieces that fit. Blessed is the one who looks.
Home
A Second John
to the seven churches. He ate the book and was told he must prophesy again. John the Apostle knew the followers of John the Baptist in Ephesus from Acts 19. He added the seven churches and Antipas. Jesus is the Lamb of the Apocalypse and the followers of the Baptist needed to know that.
Watch for more pieces that fit. Blessed is the one who looks.
Home
A Reasonable Explanation
for Eusebius and Victorinus not knowing about Antipas and the seven churches of the Apocalypse. They were looking at the first version of the Apocalypse written by John the Baptist. Seriously.
Watch for more pieces that fit. Blessed is the one who looks.
Home
A Valuable Source
for writings of the Church Fathers. It includes Victorinus whose commentary does not include Antipas and the seven churches of the Apocalypse. Since Eusebius has the same problem, this needs to be addressed but so far hasn’t been.
Watch for more pieces that fit. Blessed is the one who looks.
Home
apocalypse 