Duvduv

The Justin writing is useless in terms of making a case for establishing a second-century Christian existence. Period.

You cannot convince me that a writer seeking to appeal to the highest authority on behalf of an existing and massively growing ILLEGAL (!!) sect or sects of orthodox and/or heretics could not identify a single "apostle" upon which he based his teachings that had ostensibly become firmly established by virtue of quotes derived from what we call the canonical gospels.

It is utterly useless to appeal on behalf of an entire and vast community in the second century not only about whom JUSTIN HIMSELF could say nothing, but no later writers could SHED ANY LIGHT WHATEVER ON THE WORLD OF CHRISTIANITY IN WHICH THIS JUSTIN LIVED.

Does either Justin or ANYONE AFTER HIM identify the Old Man who introduced him to Christianity in the 2nd century? NO
Does either Justin or ANYONE AFTER HIM explain where the Old Man came from, where he learned about the Christ in his younger days? NO
Does either Justin or ANYONE AFTER HIM identify any communities in which the Christians lived anywhere in the second century? NO
Does either Justin or ANYONE AFTER HIM identify a single named apostle for the so-called Memoirs of the Apostles? NO
Does either Justin or ANYONE AFTER HIM identify any of his colleagues or predecessors in the second century? NO

This is because THERE WERE NONE OF THE ABOVE IN THE SECOND CENTURY. An the later writer of the Apology in the 4th century was a very uncreative fellow. He couldn't mention any Paul or epistles because there was NO PAUL or epistles. The author was simply putting together the bits and pieces he already had about some Jewish messiah figure.

And get it dated back into the second century to the emperor of the period. How quaint.

And when "proving" his Christ' role, does Justin EVER appeal to information available in those Memoirs whose authors he could not name, or does he always appeal to Jewish Scriptures?! There were no written gospel stories and the author simply wanted to build up his case by inventing a book containing oral aphorisms. Heck, he didn't even yet know that the stories would have contradictions among them which is WHY the aphorisms got all lumped together in "Memoirs."

aa5874

What a load of BS. You have ZERO evidence that there were NO Pauline letters before the 4th century and ZERO evidence that a 4th century author composed the writings attributed to Justin.

Please, you are just blowing a lot of hot air. You have ZERO evidence for your arguments.

Pauline writings have been dated by Paleography BEFORE the 4th century.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...stament_papyri

Duvduv

OK, so you want to ignore all the points I made in favor of so-called paleographical tests (not carbon dating mind you, which in any case can fall in error in decades and centuries), go right ahead.

But at least notice that the majority of scraps of fragments are dated from the fourth century and thereafter, and the earlier scraps could easily be analyzed from a later period, which would be unacceptable because majority opinion of western civilization requires as early a provenance for the Christ story as possible.

I mean really, look what those scraps are.....literally scraps. And from analysis academia builds whole castles!

aa5874

Please, let us NOT divert from your unsubstantiated claims.

You have ZERO evidence that the Pauline writings were composed in the 4th century and ZERO evidence that a 4th century writer composed the writings of Justin Martyr.




You very well know that P46 the Pauline writings are NOT Scraps.

Please, if you want to appear credible then you MUST show that are willing to acknowledge what the evidence really shows.

Duvduv

Surely you're not going to build an entire history based on one codice whose date cannot be confined to an earlier date without a scroll version and in the face of so many questions. Especially since it suggests a codex surviving out of some quality scriptorium of an illegal sect under persecution which in fact was only one of supposedly many sects yet this sects codex survived such circumstances. . That is extremely dubious.

aa5874

Well, that's funny because you imply that Eusebius wrote the TF and I told you that the TF was written AFTER Eusebius was probably dead based on the very same Julian's "Against the Galileans"

aa5874

Again, you are just changing your story after I post. What are you arguing about now???

Please, let us NOT divert from your unsubstantiated claims about the Pauline letters and Justin's writings.

Please show the evidence or sources of antiquity for your assertions.

Duvduv

It's not very complicated. You are claiming a second or early third century origin for a CODEX of a hundred folios written by a professional scribe for an unspecified still tiny pre-orthodox illegal sect under persecution of unknown origin.
And analysts are left witih using words like "probably," "likely," "possibly," based on writing style etc. So to hang an entire theory based on some analyses of this codex makes no sense.....A codex, as I mentioned, said to have been written by a professional scribe for an illegal tiny underground sect being persecuted in the second or early third century.

Just look at the lack of consensus between Kim and Griffin on P46 being from the first or from the second/third century. But somehow saying it's later is verboten under these circumstances as I described.

aa5874

Please, why are you always making blatant mis-leading statements?? I certainly did not say that a "professional scribe" wrote a Codex for a "tiny pre-orthodox illegal sect".

Please, you MUST be held accountable for what you say.

So, you want me to base my argument on YOUR IMAGINATION instead????

How absurd!!! Paleography and C14 are acceptable methods of dating ancient writings and material and the use of words like "probably", "likely" and "possible" are standard.

Now, please name those who have dated P 46 to the 4th century??? You seem to be irritated because there is NO evidence for 4th century Pauline writings.

Duvduv

So explain to us all HOW WHAT IS DEEMED TO BE A SMALL PERSECUTED UNDERGROUND PRE-CONSTANTINE SECT (in competition with several sects or many more according to Eusebius et al) just happened to manage to hire the services of a professional codex scribe in the second century to write a professionally written Codex reproduction of so many canonical texts rather than even a scroll, and with no indication of where such a codex would have originated!!