aa5874

It is fundamentally absurd to use Sources that are ADMITTEDLY NOT Credible to reconstruct the past.

Such a practice is most flawed.

It is most remarkable that people depend upon the Pauline letters as history while at the same time DISCREDIT the Pauline writings and EXPOSE them as being manipulated and even forgeries.

Credible Sources MUST first be located BEFORE any attempt can be made to do history at any level.

The author of Acts and the Pauline writers are NOT Credible Sources.

The Pauline writer claimed Jesus DIED yet still proclaimed that he SAW Jesus ALIVE. See 1 Cor.15.

The Pauline writer claimed he did NOT Consult with Flesh and Blood when he was called to preach about Jesus and that he did NOT get his gospel from a human being.

The Pauline writers are LIARS.

The Pauline writers are NOT Credible.

No Recovered Dated Texts support any Pauline letters to Churches in any city of the Roman Empire Before c 70 CE and NONE Support any Jesus story in the time of Pilate and Tiberius.

The HARD Evidence suggest the Pauline writings and Acts of the Apostles are NOT Credible.

Now, in the writings of Justin Martyr, it is claimed that Jesus was SECOND to God so this would Imply that up to the mid century that Jesus was NOT thought to be equal to God.

First Apology First Apology The writings attributed to Justin Martyr do NOT show that up to the mid 2nd century that Jesus was EQUAL to God as stated in the Pauline letters.

See Philippians 2.

I cannot use Sources like the NT with Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings for history when they are NOT Credible.

The writings of Justin, Aristides, Arnobius, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Tatian, Minucius Felix and the Emperor Julian are compatible with the recovered Texts and show a Big black Hole in the 1st century for any Jesus story and cult.

The Jesus story and cult were hardly known in the mid second century which completely Contradicts Irenaeus' "Against Heresies" whose dating, authorship, and chronology of the NT has been REJECTED by Scholars.

Sheshbazzar

Patty-cake, patty-cake. Justin Martyr tells us that he heard about 'Jesus Christ' from some otherwise unidentified 'Old man'.
Who was it that told this Old man about a 'Jesus Christ'?
Where and when did that 'old man' come by his knowledge of any so called 'Jesus Christ'?
Did Justin simply make up this tale?
How much of the rest of Justin's writings are simply fabrications?
Can we trust anything ascribed to Justin?

Duvduv

Shesh, we ask the same questions and will never be able to get any answers. If there was a Justin in the 2nd century which cannot be corroborated anywhere then I am Mickey Mouse.

People build whole stories around him and Marcion despite the fact that this Justin figure ostensibly lived at the same time in the same town as this Marcion and does not mention a single text or book possessed by this Marcion bogeyman, including any epistles written by someone named "Paul" or a named gospel (to compare or contrast with the "obvious" canonical gospels named Memoirs of the Apostles) or anything else. Yet people build skyscrapers about this Marcion of the Second Century about whom nothing can be corroborated because not only is nothing of his writings mentioned by the contemporaneous Justin, but not a shred remains of any writings of Marcion.

And of course we're supposed to accept as sacred truth that "Justin" wrote a book all about Marcion, but nothing of it remains.......

It's all a bunch of hooey.........

Sheshbazzar

The root question here is Justin a Source that is ADMITTEDLY NOT Credible?
And if Justin is NOT Credible, why then is aa using Justin as a credible source to reconstruct his version of the past?

aa5874

Your FIVE questions are NOT evidence of anything. In order to show that Justin Martyr is NOT Credible you have GOT to show where he made statements that he most likely fabicated.

1. Justin did NOT claim he SAW that resurrected Jesus.

2. Justin did NOT claim he got his gospel from No man.

3. Justin did NOT claim he knew any disciple or apostle of the resurrected
Jesus.

4. Justin declared his fundamental sources---Hebrew Scripture, the Memoirs, Revelation by John and the Acts of Pilate.

5. Justin CONSULTED with FLESH and Blood to find out about Jesus.

aa5874

Again, your TWO additional questions are NOT evidence of anything. Questions are NOT facts.

You MUST, MUST, MUST show that Justin Martyr made statements that HE fabricated.

The Pauline writer claimed Jesus DIED for OUR Sins yet simultaneously claimed he SAW Jesus ALIVE. See 1 Cor.15

The Pauline writer is a LIAR.

Duvduv

Tell us about it. This Justin says he learned about the christ from an old man whose name is a big secret, and about whose Christianity nothing is known. Justin lives in the same time and place as one Marcion but says nothing about any texts and writings of this bogeyman.Justin claims that he is part of a whole community but never says a word about its leaders, locales or predecessors.
And you demand, yes, DEMAND, that we accept the authenticity of this Justin.
The Justin story has no authenticity or integrity as an alleged second century representative of a Christianity.
AA, just get used to it and give up your faith in Justin!

aa5874

Please READ the writings attributed to Justin. You are

Please, please, Justin did NOT learn about Christ from the Old Man.

Justin learned about Jesus from HEBREW Scripture, the Memoirs, Revelation by John and the Acts of Pilate.

It was the Old Man who told Justin about the Writings of the Prophets.

"Dialogue with Trypho"

J-D

I give you dispensation from complying with aa5874's requirements.

Sheshbazzar

todah meode.