Sheshbazzar

Allow me to explain.
aa is correct in his statements that 'Justin's writings and statements are compatible with, and supported by other contemporary recovered and DATED texts.
This is why aa insists that 'Justin', -or rather 'Justin's' writings- serve as a Credible witness to the true and actual state of Christianity in the 2nd century CE, circa approximately 120-160 CE.

That is, 'Justin's' writings internal evidence serves as contemporary and credible evidence, that at this time Christianity DID NOT possess any gospels known as being the works of any ' Matthew', 'Mark', 'Luke', or 'the Book of Acts' or any of the 'Pauline' epistles.
All of which as aa5874 argues, were composed after the time of 'Justin's' writings, and I heartily agree.

So in this respect Justin's writings ARE 'CREDIBLE EVIDENCE' against the claims and forged history and writings of latter Christianity.
That however does not entail that 'Justin's' written statements with regard to religion, God, Jesus, or any other past characters, or mythical situations, miracles or other uncorroborated events he relates, are likewise to be accepted being likewise 'credible'.

Throughout this thread, my reservation about the 'credibility' of 'Justin' has been that of aa's statements of 'Justin's' Credibility not being properly qualified with accompanying observations that while 'Justin's' writings ARE a credible and historically compatible 'window' on the actual state of 2nd century CE Christian knowledge and beliefs, They ARE NOT at all 'credible' in the sense of being believable or trustworthy in respect to their religious statements or religiously motivated reconstructions of 1st century history.

In other words, and I am certain aa will agree, 'Justin's' writings about 'Jesus' being The 'Logos', and 'The firstborn Son of God', having been miraculously conceived to a virgin, and who performed a long list of miracles, and lived, died, and resurrected from the dead IN THE DAYS OF PONTIUS PILATE are NOT to be taken as being credible history. And that in these matters of -religion -'Justin Martyr' IS NOT A 'CREDIBLE' WITNESS.


.

aa5874

We have a CONFESSION. Justin Martyr's Credibility have been admitted by Sheshbazzar.

Your Confession is Heartily accepted.

That is PRECISELY my argument.

Justin Martyr's writings have effectively EXPOSED all the forgeries and fiction about the Jesus story and cult in Josephus "Aniquities of the Jews", Tacitus "Annals", The Epistles of Ignatius, the Epistle of Clement, the Epistle of Polycarp, "Against Heresies" by Irenaeus, "Against Marcion" by Tertullian, the Stromata by Clement of Alexandria, and "Church History" by Eusebius.

The writings of Justin Martyr is effectively the history of the Jesus cult up to the mid 2nd century.

1. The Memoirs of the Apostles was the earliest known Gospel story used as Scripture in the Churches of the Jesus cult.

2. The Ritual of the Eucharist was practised BEFORE the Pauline writings were known.

3. The name Christian was NOT applied Only to those who believed the Jesus story.

4. The claim that Nero persecuted Christians is NO indication that those Christians believed the Jesus story.

Justin Martyr's First Apology and Dialogue with Trypho is the History of the Jesus cult of Christians.

Based on Justin Martyr the earliest mention of Jesus cult Christians was around the time of Simon Barchochebas.

First Apology XXXI This statement from Justin coincides with the Recovered dated Texts.

The Jesus cult of Christians originated sometime in the 2nd century around the time of Simon Barchochebas or sometime around c 132-135 CE.

Iskander

First apology


Chapter XVI.—Concerning patience and swearing.[296]
And concerning our being patient of injuries, and ready to serve all, and free from anger, this is what He said: “To him that smiteth thee on the one cheek, offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak or coat, forbid not. And whosoever shall be angry, is in danger of the fire. And every one that compelleth thee to go with him a mile, follow him two. And let your good works shine before men, that they, seeing them, may glorify your Father which is in heaven.”1794.
1794 Luke vi. 29; Matt. vi. 22, 41, 16.


Chapter XXXIII.—Manner of Christ’s birth predicted.
And the angel of God who was sent to the same virgin at that time brought her good news, saying, “Behold, thou shalt conceive of the Holy Ghost, and shalt bear a Son, and He shall be called the Son of the Highest, and thou shalt call His name Jesus; for He shall save His people from their sins,”1831—
1831 Luke i. 32; Matt. i. 21.


Chapter LXV.—Administration of the sacraments.[329]
Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss.1908

1908 The kiss of charity, the kiss of peace, or “the peace” (ἡ εἰπήνη), was enjoined by the Apostle Paul in his Epistles to the Corinthians, Thessalonians, and Romans, and thence passed into a common Christian usage

aa5874

First Apology LXVII Justin Martyr and the Churches of the mid 2nd century did NOT use gMatthew, gMark, gLuke, gJohn, Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline and Non-Pauline Epistles.

They used the Memoirs of the Apostles or the writings of the Prophets.

It should be rather easy to understand that the Jesus stories in the Canon may have been copied from the Memoirs of the Apostles.

Justin Martyr is a WITNESS that the MEMOIRS of the Apostles were read in the Churches on Sundays in the mid 2nd century.

The Memoirs of the Apostles may have been an Early version of the Diatessaron supposedly used by Tatian a follower of Justin.

Iskander

Was the text of the memoirs saying the same as the writings known to us now as the gospels of Luke et al?

The footnotes that explain First Apology seem to be used to point out that Martyr is referring to earlier Christian writings --or perhaps an oral tradition – then called the memoirs and that the same material is called by us the gospels.

aa5874

There is nothing to prevent the Canonised Gospels like gMatthew, gLuke, and gJohn from being LATER than the Memoirs of the Apostles.

The assumption that the Canonised Gospels are early are based on False attribution of authorship by apostles called Matthew and John , and followers Mark and Luke.

In writings of Justin there is NO mention whatsoever of any Gospel writers named Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

The mere fact that Justin did acknowledge a supposed Apostle called John who had a Revelation then it can be deduced that he would have also acknowledged the Four Gospels and their authors if they were known to him.

Justin named ALL his sources and their authors when they were available.

Justin's stories of his Jesus were from the Memoirs of the Apostles, the Acts of Pontius Pilate and Revelation by John.

Iskander

The gospels are a copy of the memories of the apostles. The gospels and the memoirs are the same text,


The memories of the apostles were read in churches and they must have been circulating for some years before First Apology was written.

Who were the apostles whose writings –or oral teaching—had provided the texts used in churches before Justin Martyr wrote the First Apology?

Sheshbazzar

There is no reason to assume that. 'Justin' never quotes or relates any section of our Received texts that contain any mention of the names of these 'apostles'.
This would have been the natural case if these names had not been in The Memoirs.

The early church's struggle to gain authority over the emerging faith, and their leaders consequent claims of to have been instituted by Jesus himself would have been a strong motivation to add the all important names that were necessary to support the latter church's claim to the institution and 'Doctrine of 'Apostolic Succession', a lineage of all important names, beginning with 'Peter', without which these leaders would not have had a leg to stand on.
Dividing up the text and rearranginging it under headings of the NAMES of these now identified apostles served to better establish that each of these Saints and Apostles were identifiable personalities, and could then be used to support Catholocisims claims to various 'sees', each one of course tracing back to these now by name, identifiable apostles, and the leadership of these 'sees', through 'Apostolic Succession' tracing back in an unbroken line to one of these Apostles. (thus they had to all have traveled and have taught in, and established those various 'sees')
Rome capialized upon her power and authority by claiming Saint 'Peter' as her patron, and the rock upon which THE Catholic Church was built.

These verse sections and names are all latter Catholic interpolations.


Certainly. But that is no indication that they then contained all of the material and names that are in our present versions.


Anonymous church writers (not the 'apostles') whom writing at an early date had not seen any need to compose a text whose content could be employed to support the latter Catholic developed and required Doctrine of 'Apostolic Succession'.




.

aa5874

I wrote that the Jesus stories MAY have been copied---NOT that they are.

Your statement is also not logical. In the Canon itself, gMatthew and gLuke have similar Jesus stories but they are NOT the same texts and were NOT written at the same time if they are Copies of gMark.

The same applies to the Memoirs, they were used in the Churches based on Justin, and at a later time PARTS of the Memoirs MAY have been used to compile gMatthew and gLuke.

The Memoirs of the Apostles CONTAIN information that is NOT found in gMatthew or gLuke.

Justin Martyr is claiming to be a Witness to the Memoirs of the Apostles--Not gMatthew or gLuke.

That is expected. Justin implied that there were Christians who believed the Jesus story about the time of Simon Barchochebas c 130-135 CE.

Joseph Smith published his Book of the Mormon in 1830 and it was used in the Mormon Church the very same year.

Justin BELIEVED that there were Apostles Exactly like Mormons BELIEVE there was a character called Moroni.

There are NO recovered dated Texts by Paleography or C14 that show a Jesus cult of Christians in the 1st century where Jews and Roman citizens worshiped a character called Jesus as a God and a Savior of the Universe because he was Sacrificed and Resurrected.

In effect, there is no evidence of any Apostles and no evidence of their Activities outside the Memoirs of the Apostles in the writings of Justin.

Sheshbazzar

".....the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness.

Though it has in it nothing divine, by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable and is childish and foolish,

it has induced men to believe that the monstrous tale is truth. ." -Julian 'the Apostates' opinion of Christianity.