avi

" don't see how"
"imo"
"70 CE is the anchor"
"seems tenuous"

Is there any information in this blurb?

Have you expressed a coherent argument?

Here's what I make of your post.
SH disagrees with aa's claim that Paul's writings were created in mid second century, or, at least, AFTER the four gospels.

To explain the basis of his disagreement, SH offers his "opinion" that "70 CE is an anchor for Christianity".

Why should that date serve as anchor? Have you some evidence for Paul's correspondence that dates from 70 CE?

What seems tenuous, to me, is your post.

avi

aa5874

The writings of Philo, Josephus, and Justin Martyr are three EXTREMELY significant writings in analysing the NT.

Those three authors show without any reasonable doubt that the Jesus story and the Pauline writings are well after the Fall of the Temple.

Based on Philo and Josephus the Jesus story was likely to have started possibly just at or around the end of the 1st century. And based on Justin Martyr, the Pauline writings were likely to be sometime AFTER the middle of the 2nd century.

It would appear to me that Justin Martyr did NOT know of Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings up to the middle of the 2nd century.

Justin Martyr is the ONLY writer to have IDENTIFIED a writing called the "Memoirs of the Apostles", called Gospels, that was USED in the Churches on Sundays and he did also mention "Revelation" by John.

And further, Justin Martyr had NO post ascension activities or history for the supposed 12 apostles except that they wrote the "Memoirs of the Apostles" and preached the Gospel.

There is not a single story of the Day of Pentecost, how any of the Apostles died or that Peter did become the FIRST bishop of Rome before he and "Paul" were supposedly martyred.

There is a BIG BLACK HOLE in the writings of Justin Martyr for the Apostles and "Paul" yet Justin Martyr wrote about Simon Magus during the reign of CLAUDIUS, Menander, the Valentinians, Basilidians, Justinians, Marcians, Saturnilians and even Marcion.

Again the writings of Philo, Josephus and Justin Martyr appear to INDICATE that Jesus was all MYTH, that the Jesus story was developed sometime around the end of the 1st century and that the Pauline writings and Acts of the Apostles are AFTER the middle of the 2nd century.

rlogan

I think you can date things earlier but still reject the entirety of the Pauline Corpus as being written by some actual historical Paul.

Some of Deterings forebearers of course committed themselves to a historical Paul, legendized by the original epistles arising in Marcionite circles.

Forgive me stephan for not following the point you are making well enough as I am not sure how you incorporate a number of things in your model of thinking.

The destruction of the Temple is not particularly significant to me other than that the gospels came long, long afterwards and of course "predicted" something that was more than a generation before.

Everything on both the proto-catholic side and the marcionite side is falsely retrojected into previous history because they both "validated" themselves by pretending long-ago historical heritage and at the same time covered themselves from the possibility of living witnesses contradicting their story.

You can't have Jesus chasing a herd of 2,000 pigs into the sea last week or last month or last year or even ten years ago or twenty. It has to be so long ago that nobody alive would be around to say what hornswaggle it is. That would have been about the largest lawsuit in the history of Judea for destruction of livestock.

Likewise with these spurious letters. There is no church at Galatia some Paul is writing to and that is why the letter of Paul to the Galatians does not arise there historically, but rather in the hands of Marcion who "finds" it. One ought to find it dubious that the letter you write to someone else is not "found" by them, not used by them, not archived by them - but instead arises in another place altogether, found by someone else altogether, and promoted by someone else altogether much later in time.

Such letters cannot be fabricated contemporaneously. If they are posed as contemporaneous, falsification is instant. They have to be retrojected more than a generation past. That is the reason why they have been "forgotten" and need to be "found".

This tactic is as old as the Bible itself, from the first chapter of Genesis onward. There is no Adam and Eve, no Moses, and likewise no Jesus Christ and thus no disciples.

What you have instead is a nascant Christianity on the Pauline side of things rejecting the tyranny of the law and central authorities, but claiming heritage to much earlier times as other authors of the Bible have done. On the protocatholic side you have the gospels of course, tying themselves to Hebrew Bible prophecies for "validation", and eventually even claiming direct descent via appointment of Peter by Jesus. But there is no Peter, either.

What we see of course is the final product of synthesis and redaction after the Catholic triumph.

About all I am fairly certain of is what we know to be happening between Marcion and the Proto-catholics at Rome in the 140's.

Cheers and interested in fuller explanation of your view.

stephan huller

Without the end of sacrifices Christianity can't exist as a religion. I personally believe that Christianity as we know it - an organized religious body could not have been in existence until after 70 CE or at least that whatever was there before the destruction was so distracted by the continuation of sacrifices that it became transformed into something wholly otherwise after 70 CE. I would argue that this was when the apostle operated and his lasting legacy, the basis to his authority etc.

The real question that never gets asked is why the Jews stopped sacrificing and have continued to argue that they can't sacrifice once the temple was profaned. This is utterly baffling and can only be explained by Imperial influence as the Israelites sacrificed long before the establishment of the temple and presumably continued sacrifices in periods where they did not have access to its altar. It is utterly baffling and cannot be easily explained. The Samaritans continue to sacrifice. The temple has nothing to do with the question of sacrifices.

aa5874

So, it is very likely that there was NO "Paul", no Pauline Churches, and No Pauline Jesus called "the End of the Law" before the Fall of the Temple.

The Pauline writings appear to be historically inaccurate or anachronistic.

It is just NOT plausible that "Paul" a supposed Pharisee would have asked non-Jews and Roman citizens all over the Roman Empire to worship a DEAD Jewish MAN as a God and that the VERY DEAD JEWISH MAN COULD REMIT the SINS of ALL MANKIND through his RESURRECTION.

NOT even the DEIFIED EMPERORS of Rome had the ability to REMIT SINS.

spamandham

I don't think we can say for sure when the Pauline letters were written, but I can't see any reason to exclude a post bar Kochba time period.

Doug Shaver

I wouldn't go so far as to say it isn't possible, but I do think that any theory holding that the entire corpus was a second-century fabrication has serious problems with parsimony.

Chili

In Catholicism sins are an 'asset' with the 'forgiveness of sins' by the Church serving as a 'courage builder' to sin some more but with more enthousiasm the next time. That is how they lead us West on a [daily] basis as we leave the church with the doors facing West and 'thus' is how the 'forgiveness of sins' has power as a Sacrament and not in the acquisition of righteousness. Once again, to show that Catholics are not Christians.

Just showing you the double edged sword here wherein the 'stream of consciousness' that is entrenched from the pulpit and is held by the faithful is meant to serve only as the negative stand in the final rout wherein par-ousia is emergent, with par-ousia being the final stand that delivers the inner child . . . after also James Joyce was 'pregnant with despair' as recalled in his "Wake."

Toto

Some off topic posts have been split to E here.

aa5874

There is NO serious problem with theorizing that the Pauline writings were AFTER the middle of the second century.

The Gospel of "Paul", "Salvation through the Resurrection", was UNKNOWN to Justin Martyr and he appeared NOT to be aware that "OVER 500 people saw the resurrected Jesus.

Up to the middle of the 2nd century, Justin Martyr wrote that it was STILL said that the disciples STOLE the body of Jesus.

"Dialogue with Trypho" CVII