Duvduv

Sorry, could you expand on your reference to Against Heresies from Irenaeus. Didn't he specifically reference Paul of the epistles and Acts??

As far as the Mark Jesus being a phantom, that is not necessarily true just because no birth story was included. C.P. Sense is very determined to argue that Marcion himself was not a docetist.

Regarding the fiction of Paul, how do you understand the "pauline" nature of the epistles that are specifically attributed to "him" rather than someone like Ignatius, although pauline epistles are somewhat different from each other despite their adherence to the indwelling of the Christ?? Galatians is admittedly different in emphasis from Thessalonians, etc. but WHO were responsible for coordinating or putting together all the epistles at one time in the second or third century??
WHO had the authority to enforce his choice at that early time?

aa5874

See "Against Heresies" 2.22 where it is argued and claimed that JOHN and the other DISCIPLES of Jesus did PREACH that Jesus himself was Crucified at about 50 years old or at the time of Claudius.

See "Demonstration of Apostlic Preaching" attributed to Irenaeus where he claimed Jesus was crucified during the reign of Claudius.

It is CLEAR that "Against Heresies" has MORE than one author since it is claimed that PAUL Preached Christ CRUCIFIED BEFORE the reign of Claudius.

Well, I did make reference to Mark 6.48-49 where it is claimed Jesus was WITNESSED by the disciples as he WALKED on the sea.

With or Without a birth story, human beings are not able to WALK on sea water.

I did also make reference to Mark 9.2 where it is claimed Jesus TRANSFIGURED. With or without a birth story, human beings cannot transfigure.

gMark is a Fiction story about a Phantom that was Betrayed, Abandoned and Denied, and Rejected by his own disciples and the Jews.

What early time are you talking about? What indwelling of the Christ are you talking about?

NT Paul used the name JESUS over 160 times in the Pauline writings.

The Pauline Jesus was God INCARNATE, A MYTH.

Now, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings were FABRICATED or Manipulated to invent a fraudulent history of the Church.

Justin Marty's writings has EXPOSED the Pauline fraud that there was NO history of the Church in the 1st century but that there was only a story of Jesus that people in the 2nd century believed.

Duvduv

What I was referring to was about the epistles being attributed to "him" meaning PAUL, as opposed to Ignatius or any other possible author.

The novel idea of the epistles is that the believer is "in Christ" and the Christ figure lives in the believer, including the statement that "it is not I who lives but Christ who lives in me" etc.

I was asking who and when the epistles and Acts were fabricated given their literary differences and given the lack of a central authority to do it and enforce acceptance so early, i.e. the second or third century.
Back to you.
Originally Posted by Duvduv
...Regarding the fiction of Paul, how do you understand the "pauline" nature of the epistles that are specifically attributed to "him" rather than someone like Ignatius, although pauline epistles are somewhat different from each other despite their adherence to the indwelling of the Christ?? Galatians is admittedly different in emphasis from Thessalonians, etc. but WHO were responsible for coordinating or putting together all the epistles at one time in the second or third century??
WHO had the authority to enforce his choice at that early time?....

What early time are you talking about? What indwelling of the Christ are you talking about?

NT Paul used the name JESUS over 160 times in the Pauline writings.

The Pauline Jesus was God INCARNATE, A MYTH.

Now, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings were FABRICATED or Manipulated to invent a fraudulent history of the Church.

Justin Marty's writings has EXPOSED the Pauline fraud that there was NO history of the Church in the 1st century but that there was only a story of Jesus that people in the 2nd century believed.

aa5874

Again, I really don't know what you are trying to say.

I told you that NT Paul is a fictitious character, that Acts of the Apostles is NOT an historical account of actual events and they were NOT known up to the middle of the 2nd century based on the writings of Justin Martyr.

In Romans 16.22, it is claimed that Tertius wrote the Epistle to the Romans.

Ro 16:22 - NT Paul preached Jesus Christ Crucified.

1Corinthians 1:23 - NT Paul preached Jesus Christ Resurrected.

1Corinthians 15:17 - There is ONE problem--there is ZERO external corroboration for NT Paul as a preacher in any century. No well-known non-apologetic author wrote of NT Paul.

The evidence suggests that the Pauline writings were AFTER Justin Martyr or AFTER the mid 2nd century. There is not enough evidence available right now to say when and who actually wrote the epistles but parts of the Pauline epistles and Acts of the Apostles may have been fabricated by the Roman Church or with their approval.

Duvduv

I know he is fictitious. I was trying to raise the question of why they would all be attributed to this one name of Paul rather than to a variety of individuals.
I also know he was preaching the risen Christ, but so was the author of epistle to Hebrews and Romans. But the featuroe of the "paulines " is the indwelling of the Christ etc.
I was also trying to zero in on who historically in the early period would have had the ability to write epistles and get them accepted when there wasn't yet a centralized church, and if it was much later, why they wouldn't have included lots of references to sayings and stories from the gospels. How could they have resisted that?!

tanya

Justin Martyr, writing about 150CE, mentions the Valentinians as an heretical sect based in Rome, circa 130-140. The Valentinians in turn, reference Paul's letters, according to the evidence from Nag Hammadi Coptic translations of original Greek texts......

Duvduv

I ask traditionalists and even some radicals how the recipients of the epistles knew to hold on to their epistles in each town for the future .....and why is it that Justin's writings were retained by someone for the future. And if an odd copy from Justin managed to survive history, then why not something from Marcion?

Huon

Most easy...
God showed on which side he leant. He wiped away all those disgusting writings of Marcion and his sect.:devil1:
... with the help of the good christians.

Duvduv

The Valentinians must have gotten access to them much later because they primarily believed Paul transmitted secret information to Valentinus supposedly.
But who can trust the descriptions of the apologists themselves?

aa5874

Please identify the Nag Hammadi Coptic translations which show that Valentinians made references to NT Paul's letters and the date it was supposedly written..

I cannot find any mention of Paul in a translation of a Nag Hammadi document in reference to Valentinians.