Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 12-07-2010, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

And what makes this theory even kookier is that there are all these Church Fathers from the late second century to the time of Constantine who represent witnesses to the evolution of the concept of New Testament canon.

No, there weren't, according to Pete. He says all the writings that everybody thinks are from second and third century are Eusebian forgeries.

Setting aside whether or not the theory is kooky, at least Doug demonstrates that he has at least got some understandings of the construction of the hypothesis and the implications of the theory. That Stephan appears to relentlessly misrepresent my claims demonstrates that he has no understanding of the construction of the hypothesis and the implications of the theory. I can understand that he may not want to know, on the basis of the hypothesis being what it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

The concept of the four gospels EVOLVES over time.

Yeah, but not much time. Just the time it book Eusebius to write them.

Eusebius was the "Editor-In-Chief" and oversighted at least one scriptorium with a large team of professional scribes. They had perhaps as long as 12 years (312 to 324 CE) to evolve and compete the task. That's one gospel every 3 years. Tolkien took 12 years to write "The Lord of the Rings".

Doug Shaver · 12-07-2010, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

To understand how serious a blow this information is to Pete's theory . . . .

You're preaching to the choir. I have never regarded Pete's theory as worth serious consideration.

Toto · 12-07-2010, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The mainstream view is not that Eusebius can be trusted, or that he is an especially reliable historian.
The conclusion that you can draw from this is not that Eusebius created the entire history of Christianity
from scratch in the year 312.

Sorry, but I disagree. Carrier expresses this mainstream view in the following terms:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Carrier

Eusebius was either a liar or hopelessly credulous (see note. 6), and either way not a very good historian;

You are not disagreeing with me on the question of Eusebius' reputation.

Quote:

This is clearly an either or, and as far as I am concerned, I am researching a revisionist history based on the hypothesis that Eusebius was a liar in respect of critical historical truths that he represents to his readers. This hypothesis, not conclusion, is imo emminently warranted to be investigated.

You don't seem to be investigating it. You only seem to be drawing unwarranted conclusions.

Toto · 12-07-2010, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

The Date of Eusebius Historia Ecclesiastica

A footnote in this review below states the following:

Quote:

1. On this controversial topic, see Andrew Louth, "The Date of Eusebius Historia Ecclesiastica," Journal of Theological Studies, NS 41 (1990): 111-23, which counters T.D. Barne's arguments for an early (prior to the outbreak of the Great Persecution in 303 CE) composition date for the first seven books of the HE. R.W. Burgess, "The dates and editions of Eusebius Chronici canones and Historia Ecclesiastica," JTS 48.2 (1997) offers further evidence in support of Louths position, dating the first edition of the HE to 313/14 CE, not long after Constantines victory over Maxentius in Italy."

If the first edition was published in 313-4, it still seems most likely that Eusebius started work on it well before that date. Life of Constantine (or via: amazon.co.uk) By Eusebius, Averil Cameron, Stuart George Hall, p.2

stephan huller · 12-07-2010, 01:32 PM

Quote:

They had perhaps as long as 12 years (312 to 324 CE) to evolve and compete the task. That's one gospel every 3 years. Tolkien took 12 years to write "The Lord of the Rings".

I don't know if you are aware how kooky this theory seems to those of us who have actually read Irenaeus upwards of a hundred time. While I would rather boast of a hundred other things, I can honestly say that I am more familiar with Irenaeus than any other single author. As such your idea that these four texts were fabricated at the time of Constantine is so ludicrous it is like someone claiming that the images we see on TV are caused by an endless number of little puppets being manipulated by highly trained little mice behind the glass screen.

The point is that you not only have to have not only have to have (a) four gospels being created over that period of time but also (b) Irenaeus's evolving understanding of how those four fit together and in what order and (c) at least three competing dogmas which were pre-existent. This can't have been accomplished 'artificially' in the period you claim. Let's start with Irenaeus's introduction of the four gospels for the first time in history:

Quote:

Such, then, are the first principles of the Gospel: that there is one God, the Maker of this universe; He who was also announced by the prophets, and who by Moses set forth the dispensation of the law,--[principles] which proclaim the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and ignore any other God or Father except Him. So firm is the ground upon which these Gospels rest, that the very heretics themselves bear witness to them, and, starting from these [documents], each one of them endeavours to establish his own peculiar doctrine. For the Ebionites, who use Matthew's Gospel only, are confuted out of this very same, making false suppositions with regard to the Lord. But Marcion, mutilating that according to Luke, is proved to be a blasphemer of the only existing God, from those [passages] which he still retains. Those (qui autem) who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified. Those (hi autem qui) who follow Valentinus, making copious use of that according to John, to illustrate their conjunctions, shall be proved to be totally in error by means of this very Gospel, as I have shown in the first book. Since, then, our opponents do bear testimony to us, and make use of these [documents], our proof derived from them is firm and true. [AH 3.11.7]

It is often overlooked that something is causing Irenaeus to invert the natural order of the gospels here for the passage reflects Matthew, Luke, Mark and then John rather than Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. It has been suggested that the order wasn't already established at this point but this aptly dismissed by Trobisch. Why then the strange shift?

Well the first thing we should be aware of is the fact that elsewhere in Irenaeus the argument is clearly made that the order of the gospels in the New Testament is established chronologically (i.e. when the dates for which texts were actually written). So now Matthew was written when Peter and Paul were in Rome preaching, Mark was established near the end of Peter's life through some sort of dictation from the latter to the former, Luke was the companion of Paul presumably written after the death of the two apostles and John at the close of the first century. This understanding was in fact established at the beginning of Book Three so there has to be a good reason why Irenaeus would now invert the order in chapter eleven of the same book.

Just for fun it might be interesting to see what would happen if we were to put the sects associated with 'Luke' and 'Mark' in AH 3.10.7 following the natural order of the gospels. Irenaeus would have written then:

Quote:

from these [documents], each one of them endeavours to establish his own peculiar doctrine. For the Ebionites, who use Matthew's Gospel only, are confuted out of this very same, making false suppositions with regard to the Lord. Those (qui autem) who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified. But Marcion, mutilating that according to Luke, is proved to be a blasphemer of the only existing God, from those [passages] which he still retains. Those who follow Valentinus, making copious use of that according to John, to illustrate their conjunctions, shall be proved to be totally in error by means of this very Gospel, as I have shown in the first book [AH 3.11.8]

At first glance there doesn't seem to much of a difference here save for the fact that the anonymous sect referenced only by the connecting phrase 'qui autem' are now attached to the Ebionites. Interestingly Irenaeus uses the exact terminology in Book One to introduce the Ebionites after the description of the Cerinthians - "those who are called Ebionites (qui autem dicuntur Ebionaei) agree (with the Cerinthians) that the world was made by God." (AH 1.26.2).

The point here is that the reference to 'others' here means 'other Marcionites.' I will prove this shortly.

Indeed after immediately going to explain why "it is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds ... it is fitting that she [the Church] should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh" throught the four cherubim, Irenaeus continues to develop the Matthew, Luke, Mark and then John order. For Irenaeus identifies Matthew as the lion, Luke as the calf, Mark as the man and John as the eagle.

Yet it is very strange that in the next part of the section seems to have been written by another hand for the explanation of the cherubim suddenly changes.

Quote:

"The first living creature was like a lion," symbolizing His effectual working, His leadership, and royal power; the second [living creature] was like a calf, signifying sacrificial and sacerdotal order; but "the third had, as it were, the face as of a man,"--an evident description of His advent as a human being; "the fourth was like a flying eagle," pointing out the gift of the Spirit hovering with His wings over the Church. And therefore the Gospels are in accord with these things, among which Christ Jesus is seated. For that according to John relates His original, effectual, and glorious generation from the Father, thus declaring, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Also, "all things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made." For this reason, too, is that Gospel full of all confidence [i.e. like a lion], for such is His person. But that according to Luke, taking up [His] priestly character, commenced with Zacharias the priest offering sacrifice to God. For now was made ready the fatted calf, about to be immolated for the finding again of the younger son. Matthew, again, relates His generation as a man, saying, "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham;" and also, "The birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise." This, then, is the Gospel of His humanity; for which reason it is, too, that [the character of] a humble and meek man is kept up through the whole Gospel. Mark, on the other hand, commences with [a reference to] the prophetical spirit coming down from on high to men, saying, "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it is written in Esaias the prophet,"--pointing to the winged aspect of the Gospel; and on this account he made a compendious and cursory narrative, for such is the prophetical character [i.e. like an eagle]. [AH 3.11.8]

What is so interesting here is that the order of living creatures differs in Ezekiel and Revelations. The former reads man, lion, ox, eagle the latter lion, ox, man, eagle. Irenaeus never follows the order of Ezekiel but the way the specific gospels 'line up' with each living creature does change. This is one of a number of very strong pieces of evidence that Book Three was not actually written by Irenaeus from beginning to end but assembled out of bits and pieces from original lectures and writings by a disciple posthumously.

In any event we have discovered two pairings in AH 3.11.8 which can't have been written by Irenaeus one after the other. The first Matthew-lion, Luke-calf, Mark-man and John-eagle the second John-lion, Luke-calf, Matthew-man and Mark-eagle. The reason this is significant is that the identification of Mark with the eagle necessarily connects Mark with the 'spiritual gospel' the text which Irenaeus says "the gift of the Spirit hovering with His wings over the Church" and "the fourth, that which renovates man, and sums up all things in itself by means of the Gospel, raising and bearing men upon heavenly kingdom.its wings into the heavenly gospel." The language here clearly accords with the idea of 'mystic Mark' being a 'more spiritual gospel' which contains a reference to a spiritual form of baptism (notice the use of 'renovate').

The assumption here can only be that at some point in Irenaeus's career he changed his mind about the order of the gospels. The order in Ezekiel coupled with Mark's traditional role as 'lion' was the confirmation of the current gospel ordering (i.e. Matthew-man, Mark-lion, Luke-calf, John-eagle). Yet the pairing of Mark then Luke was problematic so Irenaeus must have developed his fourfold gospel = cherubim argument from Revelations instead of Ezekiel in order to facilitate the desired pairing (i.e. where Luke preceded Mark).

Why was it so important to have Mark in third place? It clearly has to have something to with the pre-existent Alexandrian testimony (based on 1 Corinthians 2.1 - 3.10) that the public "gospel of Christ" was created before the Alexandrian gospel of Mark. Irenaeus clearly witnesses the order of John first and Mark last thus according Mark with the role of 'more spiritual' gospel. Then when we continue down to the section that immediately follows the one we just cited it is apparent that "those who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark" are not merely preferring a 'Mark-like' gospel but also rejecting the 'Gospel of John':

Quote:

These things being so, all who destroy the form of the Gospel are vain, unlearned, and also audacious; those, [I mean,] who represent the aspects of the Gospel as being either more in number than as aforesaid, or, on the other hand, fewer. The former class [do so], that they may seem to have discovered more than is of the truth; the latter, that they may set the dispensations of God aside. For Marcion, rejecting the entire Gospel, yea rather, cutting himself off from the Gospel, boasts that he has part of the Gospel. Others (alli) truly, in order that they might set frustrate the gift of the spirit which in recent times has been poured out upon humankind by the good pleasure of the father, do not admit that aspect [of the fourfold gospel] which is according to the gospel of John, in which the Lord promised that he would send the paraclete, but simultaneously put away both the gospel and the prophetic spirit; wretched men indeed! who wish to be pseudo- prophets, forsooth, but who set aside the gift of prophecy from the Church; acting like those who, on account of such as come in hypocrisy, hold themselves aloof from the communion of the brethren. We must conclude, moreover, that these men can not admit the Apostle Paul either. For, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, he speaks expressly of prophetical gifts, and recognises men and women prophesying in the Church. Sinning, therefore, in all these particulars, against the Spirit of God, they fall into the irremissible sin. But those who are from Valentinus, being, on the other hand, altogether reckless, while they put forth their own compositions, boast that they possess more Gospels than there really are. Indeed, they have arrived at such a pitch of audacity, as to entitle their comparatively recent writing "the Gospel of Truth," though it agrees in nothing with the Gospels of the Apostles, so that they have really no Gospel which is not full of blasphemy. [AH 3.11.9]

This section of text is utterly butchered in Harvey's translation and his interpretation is utterly nonsensical too. For there can be no doubt that the same group connected with 'Marcion' as 'others' (i.e. other Marcionites) employ a secret gospel of Mark (so F. F. Bruce and others) and deny that the Gospel of John is the 'more spiritual' gospel and the one which should be the 'final word' on the evangelical dispensation.

The difficulty of course for Harvey and others is to make sense of a context where a 'fuller' gospel of Mark (i.e. one which included the idea that Christ wasn't Jesus and that he survived the Passion with divine apatheia) might be connected with absolute hostility to the Catholic understanding of the Paraclete as 'the Holy Spirit.' The solution to the dilemma is provided to us by Origen who uses the exact same 'Marcion and others' formulation as we just saw in Irenaeus:

Quote:

The apostle Paul warns against inordinate and irrational love when he says of himself, "I fear that someone might have an opinion of me above what he sees or hears from me, and that the greatness of the revelations might exalt me," and so on. (2 Cor 12:6-7) Paul feared that even he might fall into this error. So he was unwilling to state everything about himself that he knew. He wanted no one to think more of him than he saw or, going beyond the limits of honor, to say what had been said about john, that "he was the Christ." Some people said this even about Dositheus, the heresiarch of the Samaritans; others said it also about judas the Galilean. Finally, some people burst forth into such great audacity of love that they invented new and unheard of exaggerations about Paul. For, some say this, that the passage in Scripture that speaks of "sitting at the Savior's right and left" (Mk 10:38) applies to Paul and Marcion: Paul sits at his right hand and Marcion at his left. Others read the passage, "I shall send you an advocate, the Spirit of Truth," (Jn 14:16) and are unwilling to understand a third person besides the Father and the Son, a divine and exalted nature. They take it to mean the apostle Paul. Do not all of these seem to you to have loved more than is fitting and, while they admired the virtue of each, to have lost moderation in love?" [Origen, Homilies on Luke 23]

It is impossible now not to see that the two groups of Marcionites who identify the author of the Apostolikon as either enthroned beside Jesus or the Paraclete do so through two different gospels, the first which makes references to common synoptic passages and the second which makes reference to 'more spiritual' passages such as that relating to the Paraclete.

The point now is that if this were a wholly artificial creation ex nihilo as you claim it would be impossible for us to find connections 'behind the scenes' - i.e. in the heretical traditions which the Catholic Church opposed.

So then when we were discussing the figure of Mani and people were questioning how Paraclete can mean 'Christ' the answer is plainly again that the Manichaeans were appropriating their understanding of the terminology from the Marcionites for whom Paul was the original Paraclete (see Acts of Archelaus throughout).

Now when we go back and compare the beliefs of this 'third group' sandwiched between the Marcionites who used Luke and the Valentinians who used John you can see quite easily that these Marcionites who 'preferred' Mark and whose fuller gospel of Mark separated Christ and Jesus into two separate people are the same sect who are hostile to the Gospel of John for its claims about the Paraclete being the Holy Spirit.

People who are interested in this argument and its support of the authenticity of Secret Mark can go to my blog (http://stephanhuller.blogspot.com/) but the point I am trying to make here is that it is only because you are not familiar with the Patristic writings that they seem to be arbitrary creations artificially established ex nihilo by a conspiracy of Constantine. The reality is that they certainly come from the same time as Clement's Letter to Theodore which testifies to the context out of which the four canonical gospels subsequently developed

mountainman · 12-07-2010, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

They had perhaps as long as 12 years (312 to 324 CE) to evolve and compete the task. That's one gospel every 3 years. Tolkien took 12 years to write "The Lord of the Rings".

I don't know if you are aware how kooky this theory seems to those of us who have actually read Irenaeus upwards of a hundred time.

I cant even begin to tell you how many times I read and really enjoyed the reading of Desidera ("Go placidly amid the noise and haste, ...")

Quote:

While I would rather boast of a hundred other things, I can honestly say that I am more familiar with Irenaeus than any other single author. As such your idea that these four texts were fabricated at the time of Constantine is so ludicrous it is like ....

(1) At first appeared ludicrous to me that "Desiderata" was not written in 1692 (as claimed on the propaganda), but in fact 235 years afterwards.
(2) As soon as I got over that, it was to me then immediately a bitter disappointment to acknowledged that I had been living under a delusion for a while about the antiquity one of my favorite bits of text.
(3) Soon I began to realise that I was still inspired by the text despite this discovery.
(4) This made me realise that the anonymous poet Max Ehrmann was very skilled in his business.
(5) I read (and enjoyed) some more works by the poet Max Ehrmann

I could also cite the example of the "Oration of Chief Seattle and given enough time and resources other like material.

Quote:

The point is that you not only have to have not only have to have (a) four gospels being created over that period of time but also (b) Irenaeus's evolving understanding of how those four fit together and in what order and (c) at least three competing dogmas which were pre-existent. This can't have been accomplished 'artificially' in the period you claim.

I disagree. Evidence suggests that a primitive, technically "flat" but effective "Spread sheet" type technology" was available to this epoch of the early fourth century, exemplified by the existence and the presentation of the "Hexapla" of Origen. Eusebius also provides many examples of his skillful use of "tables" of data in various of his publications, including the "Canon Tables".

In other words, it is possible that what we see in Irenaeus particularly, is a series of phased constructions, dealing with other series of phased heresies, and issues of orthodoxy, (in other words multiple issues) which have been planned and implemented by the ability to weave the fabrication together with the semblance of an "evolution of understanding" by the simple use of multi-column data tables, behind the scenes, as the scaffolding for categories of heresey, evolution from idea 101 to 201 and 301 etc.

You obviously reject this possibility, and yet have mentioned on more than one occassion the artificial nature of Irenaeus, an island of orthodox heresiology in an ocean of pagan Graeco-Roman culture.

Quote:

The point now is that if this were a wholly artificial creation ex nihilo as you claim it would be impossible for us to find connections 'behind the scenes' - i.e. in the heretical traditions which the Catholic Church opposed.

Classical scholars of the "Historia Augusta" now recognise it is a forgery, presenting fake documents, invented sources, and sources to disagree with them. Biblical scholars of the "Historia Ecclesiastica" still cling to the notion and the unexamined postulate, that sources such as Irenaeus are "genuine people" who have not been invented to retroject the historical witness of canonical orthodoxy into the "Church History", and/or to retroject the historical witness of noncanonical heresy into the same account.

stephan huller · 12-07-2010, 08:00 PM

Even these examples you cite have nothing in common with the kookiness of your theory. At least there was a Chief Seattle or the Augustan Histories are filled with references to actual people (unless you claim otherwise; maybe you'll claim I don't exist).

I am just trying to make sure I understand you correctly. You are saying that every single ante-Nicene Christian figure here on this list is a wholly fictitious person, with no basis in reality right?

Jesus, Simon (Peter), Andrew, James, John, Philip, Nathaniel (Bartholomew), Matthew, Thomas, James (son of Alpheus), Simon the Zealot, Judas (son of James), Judas (Iscariot), Thaddaeus, James, the son of Joseph, Mary Magdala, Mary the mother of Jesus, Joseph, James the Brother of Jesus, Mary Salome, Martha, Simon, the son of Cleopas, Cleopas, his father, Joses, Simon, Judah, Barnabas, Manaeus, Ananias, who baptized Paul, Cephas, who preached at Antioch, Joseph, the senator, Nicodemus, the Archon, Nathaniel, the chief scribe, Justus (i.e. Joseph, called Barsabba, Silas, Judah, John (Mark), Mnason, who received Paul, Manael, foster-brother of Herod, Simon, called Niger, Jason (see Acts xvii. 5-9), Rufus (see Rom. xvi. 13), Alexander, Simon, the Cyrenian, their father, Lucius, the Cyrenian, Judah (mentioned in Acts), Judah, who is called Simon, Eurion (Orion), the splay-footed, Thorus, Thorisus, Zabdon, Zakron, Philip, whose three (sic) daughters prophesied (see Acts xxi. 9), Stephen, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon; Parmenas; Nicolaus (Acts vi. 5), Andronicus, the Greek (Rom. xvi. 7), Titus, Timothy, the following were with Peter in Rome -Hermas, Plighta, Patrobas, Asyncritus, Hermas, Criscus (II Tim. iv. 10), Milichus, Crito, Simon, Gaius, who received Paul, Abrazon, Apollos, Cerinthus, Simon, Levi, Bar-Kubba, Cleon, Hymenaeus, Candarus, Clithon, Demas, Narcissus, Slîkîspus, Thaddaeus, Maruntha, Luke the Physician, Apollos, the elect, Ampelius, Urbanus, Stachys, Publius, Aristobulus, Stephen, Herodion, the son of Narcissus, Olympas, Mark the Evangelist, Addai, Aggai, Mar Mari, Jude, Josephus, Timothy, Titus, Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Papias, Matthias, Quadratus of Athens, Aristides, Basilides, Valentinus, Marcion, Aristo of Pella, Epiphanes, Mathetes, Diognetus, Ptolemy, Isidore, Fronto, Justin Martyr, Heracleon, Tatian, Claudius Apollinaris, Apelles, Julius Cassianus, Octavius of Minucius Felix, Carpus, Melito of Sardis, Hegesippus, Dionysius of Corinth, Lucian of Samosata, Athenagoras of Athens, Irenaeus of Lyons, Rhodon, Theophilus of Caesarea, Celsus, Galen, the Scillitan Martyrs, Theophilus of Antioch, Apollonius, Bardesanes, Hippolytus of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Maximus of Jerusalem, Polycrates of Ephesus, Pantaenus, Anonymous Anti-Montanist, Abercius, Tertullian, Serapion of Antioch, Apollonius, Caius of Rome, Philostratus, Origen of Alexandria, Ambrose of Alexandria, Cyprian, Novatian, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Julius Africanus, Anatolius and Minor Writers, Methodius, Arnobius, Anatolius, Alexander of Cappadocia, Theognostus of Alexandria, Pierius of Alexandria, Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Theodotus, Mar Jacob, Sharbil, Barsamya, Habib the Martyr, Guria, Shamuna, Mara, Son of Serapion, [bishops of Rome] Linus, Anacletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, Anicetus, Soterus, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus/Callistus, Urban, Pontianus, Anterius, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius I, Stephen I, Sixtus II, Dionysius of Rome, Felix I, Eutychianus, Caius/Gaius I, Marcellinus, Marcellus I, Eusebius of Rome, Melchiades/Miltiades, [bishops of Alexandria] Anianus, Avilius, Kedron, Primus, Justus, Eumenes, Mark II, Celadion, Agrippinus, Julian, Demetrius, Heraclas, Dionysius, Maximus, Theonas, Peter of Alexandria, Achillas [bishops of Antioch] Euodius, Hero I, Cornelius, Eros/Heros II, Theophilus, Maximus I/Maximianus, Serapion, Ascelpiades/Aslipiades, Philetus, Zebinnus/Zebinus/Zenobius, Babylas, Fabius, Demetrius/Demetrian, Paul of Samosata, Domnus I/Dmonus, Timaeus, Cyril, Tyrannos/Tyrannion, Viitalis/Vitalius, [bishop of Jerusalem] James the Brother, Symeon/Simon I, Ioustos/Judas/Justus I, Zakheos/Zakhaios/Zacchaeus, Tobias, Beniamin/Veniamin/Benjamin I, John/Ioannis I, Matthew/Matthias I, Phillip, Senekas/Seneca, Ioustos/Justus II, Levis/Levy/Levi, Efrem/Efraim/Ephres, Joseph I, Judas, Marcus/Markos/Mark, Cassianos/Kassianos/Cassian, Pouplios/Publius, Maximus I, Ioulianos/Julian I, Gaios/Gaius I, Simmahos/Symmachus, Gaios/Gaius II, Ioulianos/Oialis/Julian II, Capion/Kapion/Capito, Maximus II, Antonios/Antoninus, Oualis/Oialis/Valens, Dolihianos/Dolichian, Narkissos/Narcissus II, Dios, Germanion, Gordios, Alexander, Mazabanis/Mazabanes, Imeneos/Ymenaios/Hymenaeus, Zamvdas/Zambdas/Zabdas, Ermon/Hermo, [bishops of Byzantium] Stachys the Apostle, Onesimus, Polycarpus I, Plutarch, Sedecion, Diogenes, Eleutherius, Felix, Polycarpus II, Athendodorus, Euzois, Laurence, Alypius, Pertinax, Olympians, Mark I, Philadelphus, Ciriacus I, Castinus, Eugenius I, Titus, Dometius, Rufinus I, Probus, Metrophanes

mountainman · 12-07-2010, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I am just trying to make sure I understand you correctly.

Thanks - I appreciate that.

Quote:

You are saying that every single ante-Nicene Christian figure here on this list is a wholly fictitious person, with no basis in reality right?

Jesus, Simon (Peter), Andrew, James, John, Philip, Nathaniel (Bartholomew), Matthew, Thomas, James (son of Alpheus), Simon the Zealot, Judas (son of James), Judas (Iscariot), Thaddaeus, James, the son of Joseph, Mary Magdala, Mary the mother of Jesus, Joseph, James the Brother of Jesus, Mary Salome, Martha, Simon, the son of Cleopas, Cleopas, his father, Joses, Simon, Judah, Barnabas, Manaeus, Ananias, who baptized Paul, Cephas, who preached at Antioch, Joseph, the senator, Nicodemus, the Archon, Nathaniel, the chief scribe, Justus (i.e. Joseph, called Barsabba, Silas, Judah, John (Mark), Mnason, who received Paul, Manael, foster-brother of Herod, Simon, called Niger, Jason (see Acts xvii. 5-9), Rufus (see Rom. xvi. 13), Alexander, Simon, the Cyrenian, their father, Lucius, the Cyrenian, Judah (mentioned in Acts), Judah, who is called Simon, Eurion (Orion), the splay-footed, Thorus, Thorisus, Zabdon, Zakron, Philip, whose three (sic) daughters prophesied (see Acts xxi. 9), Stephen, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon; Parmenas; Nicolaus (Acts vi. 5), Andronicus, the Greek (Rom. xvi. 7), Titus, Timothy, the following were with Peter in Rome -Hermas, Plighta, Patrobas, Asyncritus, Hermas, Criscus (II Tim. iv. 10), Milichus, Crito, Simon, Gaius, who received Paul, Abrazon, Apollos, Cerinthus, Simon, Levi, Bar-Kubba, Cleon, Hymenaeus, Candarus, Clithon, Demas, Narcissus, Slîkîspus, Thaddaeus, Maruntha, Luke the Physician, Apollos, the elect, Ampelius, Urbanus, Stachys, Publius, Aristobulus, Stephen, Herodion, the son of Narcissus, Olympas, Mark the Evangelist, Addai, Aggai, Mar Mari, Jude, Josephus, Timothy, Titus, Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Papias, Matthias, Quadratus of Athens, Aristides, Basilides, Valentinus, Marcion, Aristo of Pella, Epiphanes, Mathetes, Diognetus, Ptolemy, Isidore, Fronto, Justin Martyr, Heracleon, Tatian, Claudius Apollinaris, Apelles, Julius Cassianus, Octavius of Minucius Felix, Carpus, Melito of Sardis, Hegesippus, Dionysius of Corinth, Lucian of Samosata, Athenagoras of Athens, Irenaeus of Lyons, Rhodon, Theophilus of Caesarea, Celsus, Galen, the Scillitan Martyrs, Theophilus of Antioch, Apollonius, Bardesanes, Hippolytus of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Maximus of Jerusalem, Polycrates of Ephesus, Pantaenus, Anonymous Anti-Montanist, Abercius, Tertullian, Serapion of Antioch, Apollonius, Caius of Rome, Philostratus, Origen of Alexandria, Ambrose of Alexandria, Cyprian, Novatian, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Julius Africanus, Anatolius and Minor Writers, Methodius, Arnobius, Anatolius, Alexander of Cappadocia, Theognostus of Alexandria, Pierius of Alexandria, Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Theodotus, Mar Jacob, Sharbil, Barsamya, Habib the Martyr, Guria, Shamuna, Mara, Son of Serapion, [bishops of Rome] Linus, Anacletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, Anicetus, Soterus, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus/Callistus, Urban, Pontianus, Anterius, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius I, Stephen I, Sixtus II, Dionysius of Rome, Felix I, Eutychianus, Caius/Gaius I, Marcellinus, Marcellus I, Eusebius of Rome, Melchiades/Miltiades, [bishops of Alexandria] Anianus, Avilius, Kedron, Primus, Justus, Eumenes, Mark II, Celadion, Agrippinus, Julian, Demetrius, Heraclas, Dionysius, Maximus, Theonas, Peter of Alexandria, Achillas [bishops of Antioch] Euodius, Hero I, Cornelius, Eros/Heros II, Theophilus, Maximus I/Maximianus, Serapion, Ascelpiades/Aslipiades, Philetus, Zebinnus/Zebinus/Zenobius, Babylas, Fabius, Demetrius/Demetrian, Paul of Samosata, Domnus I/Dmonus, Timaeus, Cyril, Tyrannos/Tyrannion, Viitalis/Vitalius, [bishop of Jerusalem] James the Brother, Symeon/Simon I, Ioustos/Judas/Justus I, Zakheos/Zakhaios/Zacchaeus, Tobias, Beniamin/Veniamin/Benjamin I, John/Ioannis I, Matthew/Matthias I, Phillip, Senekas/Seneca, Ioustos/Justus II, Levis/Levy/Levi, Efrem/Efraim/Ephres, Joseph I, Judas, Marcus/Markos/Mark, Cassianos/Kassianos/Cassian, Pouplios/Publius, Maximus I, Ioulianos/Julian I, Gaios/Gaius I, Simmahos/Symmachus, Gaios/Gaius II, Ioulianos/Oialis/Julian II, Capion/Kapion/Capito, Maximus II, Antonios/Antoninus, Oualis/Oialis/Valens, Dolihianos/Dolichian, Narkissos/Narcissus II, Dios, Germanion, Gordios, Alexander, Mazabanis/Mazabanes, Imeneos/Ymenaios/Hymenaeus, Zamvdas/Zambdas/Zabdas, Ermon/Hermo, [bishops of Byzantium] Stachys the Apostle, Onesimus, Polycarpus I, Plutarch, Sedecion, Diogenes, Eleutherius, Felix, Polycarpus II, Athendodorus, Euzois, Laurence, Alypius, Pertinax, Olympians, Mark I, Philadelphus, Ciriacus I, Castinus, Eugenius I, Titus, Dometius, Rufinus I, Probus, Metrophanes

The postulate considers the above were either ahistorical inventions or they were historical pagan authors who underwent a process of Eusebian "Christianization", the classic example being Origen, and his spiritual master Ammonias Saccas, whom you have not listed, but whom Eusebius, via the mouthpiece of forgeries under the name of Porphyry, declares to be Christian. Another example above, Apollos (bolded) assumed to be the one mentioned as the teacher in Acts is listed in Codex Bezae as "Apollonius" and whom I take to be a veiled reference by the fabricator of Acts to the historical Apollonius of Tyana.

The original (2008) formulation of the Eusebian fiction postulate is here.

Quote:

Identifying Four Categories of the Authors of Antiquity

It is our postulate that the Constantinian political regime was corrupt and that christian history which was to be presented as legitimate and authentic, and to be associated with this new top-down-emperor cult, was in fact fabricated by the invention of legions of fictitious authors which are classified into Category 1, with their respective works. In the first place I will list the four categories of the authors of antiquity that the thesis deals with:

1) The fictional prenicene christians (who babble about things "christian")
2) The historical prenicene "pagans" (who have no knowledge of anything "christian").
3) The historical post-nicene christians
4) The historical post-nicene "pagans" and ascetics

Once I have listed the detailed authors and their respective categories, I will defend the postulate, on the basis that it represents the simplest method to explain the political chaos of the fourth century between the groups 3 and 4, and all known archaeological and/or scientific citations that are present in the field of ancient history.

To anyone thinking that such large scale "mockumentary forgery" was unheard of in the 4th century, a quick analysis of the "Historia Augusta" would be a recommended.

CATEGORY 1: AHISTORICAL PRENICENE CHRISTIANS

This category includes all source authors mentioned in the Eusebian Ecclesiastical History and In preparation for the Gospels, on the basis that Eusebius has simply fabricated his "christian sources", and is thus quoting himself. This category of authors is presented below. Jesus is included on the basis that Eusebius pointedly presents him as the author of letter to the King of Edessa, Agbar, which he tells us is on his desk in front of him as he writes. He asserts that he found it in the archives, and that he will translate it, for our benefit, from the Syriac to the Greek:

Jesus of Nazareth (0-33), Judas (0-40), Simon Magus (0-50), Jude (0-60), Barnabas (0-61), Paul (20-65), Matthew (0-70), Mark (0-70), Luke (0-70), John (0-70), Peter (0-70), Clement of Rome (18-98), Ignatius of Antioch (40-117), Aristides the Philosopher (70-134), Basilides (120-140), Marcion (130-140), Papias (110-140), Quadratus (70-140), Agrippa Castor (90-145), Aquila of Sinope (of Pontus) (90-150), Aristo of Pella (130-150), Polycarp (110-155), Valentinus (120-160), Epiphanes (130-160), Marcion of Sinope (110-160), Justin Martyr (150-160), Isidore (140-160), Carpocrates of Alexandria (80-160), Minucius Felix (140-170), Melito of Sardis (165-175), Dionysius of Corinth (165-175), Excerpts of Theodotus (150-180), Athenagoras of Athens (175-180), Apelles (160-180), Apollinaris Claudius (120-180), Julius Cassianus (160-180), Hegesippus (110-180), Heracleon (150-180), Ptolemy (140-180), Pinytus of Crete (130-180), Rhodon (175-185), Theophilus of Caesarea (175-185), Tatian (135-185), Theophilus of Antioch (180-185), Irenaeus of Lyons (175-185), Apollonius (136-186), Anonymous Anti-Montanist (193-193), Maximus of Jerusalem (185-195), Polycrates of Ephesus (130-196), Victor I (189-199), Mathetes (130-200), Diognetus (130-200), Clement of Alexandria (182-202), Apollonius (200-210), Pantaenus (190-210), Serapion of Antioch (200-210), Tertullian (197-220), Bardesanes (180-220), Caius (200-220), Hippolytus of Rome (180-230), Ammonius Saccas (155-245), Octavius of Minucius Felix (160-250), Alexander (of Cappadocia,Jerusalem) (150-250), Cornelius (of Rome) (200-253), Cyprian of Carthage (200-258), Novatian (201-258), Dionysius (of Alexandria) the Great (200-264), Dionysius of Rome (210-268), Gregory Thaumaturgus (212-275), Paul of Samosata (200-275), Hermias (210-280), Malchion (of Antioch) (220-290), Anatolius of Laodicea in Syria (222-290) Victorinus (bishop) of Petau (240-303), Arnobius (245-305), Phileas (Bishop) of Thmuis (250-307), Pamphilus (250-309), Peter of Alexandria (250-311), Methodius (250-311), Miltiades (Pope 311-314)

CATEGORY 2: HISTORICAL PRE-NICENE PAGANS

The second category of authors are those who never knew anything whatsoever about the existence of either Jesus, the Apostles, or the "nation of christians" in the period from the first century to the Council of Nicaea. These authors have been referred to as "pagans", but they would have considered themselves part of the Egypto-Graeco-Roman empire. Any references by any of the following authors, to "christianity, etc" are to be separately explicated as either interpolations, or more substantive forgeries by either Eusebius in the fourth century, through to other pious forgers of the 15th century:

Gaius Asinius Pollio (-76-5), Nicolaus of Damascus (-65-5), Augustus (-63-14), Livy (Titus Livius) (-59-17), Ovid (Publius Ovidius Naso) (-43-17), Herod Archelaus (-23-18), King Juba II (of Lybia) (-52-23), Strabo (-64-24), Aulus Cremutius Cordus (-25-25), Herod of Chalcis (-10-27), Gaius Asinius Pollio (Jnr) (-20-30), Marcus Velleius Paterculus (-19-31), Thrasyllus of Mendes (-36-36), Tiberius (-42-37), Aulus Cornelius Celsus (-20-37), Seneca (the Elder) (-54-39), Pontius Pilate (-10-40), Herod Antipas (-20-40), Ptolemy of Mauretania (-1-40), Caligula (12-41), Agrippa I (Herod Agrippa) (-10-44), Zeno of Sidon (-100-44), Diophantus (-20-44), Gaius Sallustius Passienus Crispus (1-47), Philo-Judaeus (-15-50), Abgar V of Edessa (-4-50), Remmius Palaemon (-10-51), Claudius (-10-54), Lucius Iunius Moderatur Columella (1-60), Persius (Aulus Persius Flaccus) (34-62), Lucan (Marcus Annaeus Lucanus) (39-65), Seneca (the Younger) (-4-65), Thrasea Paetus (20-66), Petronius (27-66), Nero (37-68), Galba (-3-69), Otho (32-69), Vitellus (15-69), Dioscorides (1-70), Cornutus (39-70), Moderatus of Gades (Cadiz, Spain) (0-70), Asconius Pedianus (-9-76), Helvidius Priscus (35-77), Demetrius the Cynic (36-77), Vespasian (9-79), Pliny the Elder (23-79), Quintus Curtius Rufus (10-80), Damis (0-80), Chariton (10-80), Titus (39-81), Memnon of Heraclea (20-90), Mucianus (20-90), Statius (Publius Papinius Statius) (45-96), Domitian (51-96), Nerva (30-98), Apollonius of Tyana (-4-98), Quintilian (Marcus Fabius Quintilia (35-100), Agrippa II (27-100), Musonius Rufus (30-100), Flavius Josephus (37-100), Neilus (son of Theon) (50-100), Silius Italicus (25-101), Martial (40-102), Pliny the Younger (63-113), Juvenal (40-115), Trajan (Marcus Nerva Traianus) (53-117), Tacitus (Cornelius) (56-117 ), Plutarch, Mestrius (46-120), Aelianus Tacticus (50-120), Nicomachus of Gerasa (Jerash, Jorda (60-120), Dio Chrysostom (of Prusa) (40-120), Curtis Rufus, Quintus (70-120), Florus (60-130), Suetonius (70-131), Epictetus (55-135), Secundus (the philosopher) (76-138), Soranus of Ephesus (98-138), Hadrian (Publius Aelius Traianus) (76-138), Ptolemaeus Chennus (60-140), Demonax (70-140), Favorinus (80-150), Aristocles of Messene (100-150), Antoninus Pius (86-161), Appian of Alexandria (95-165), Sextus of Chaeroneia (90-165), Ptolemy (Claudius Ptolemaeus) (90-168), Fronto (Cornelius) (100-170), Junius Rusticus (90-170), Artemidorus (100-170), Avidius Cassius (130-175), Arrian of Nicomedia (92-175), Lucian of Samosata (165-175), Herodes Atticus (101-177), Celsus (178-178), Alciphron (120-180), Aulus Gellius (125-180), Marcus Aurelius (Antoninus) (121-180), Lucius Apuleius (123-180), Thallus (90-180), Pausanias (110-180), Rufus of Ephesus (110-180), Alexander of Cottyaeum (117-181), Aelius Aristides (117-181), Symmachus the Ebionite (110-190), Longus (120-190), Granius Licinianus (120-190), Numenius of Apamea (140-190), Hermas (120-190), Commodus (161-192), Pertinax (126-193), Didius Julianus (133-193), Pescennius Niger (140-194), Sextus Pompeius Festus (120-195), Clodius Albinus (150-197), Alexander of Aphrodisias (120-199), Phlegon (99-199), Mara Bar Serapion (073-200), Julian the Theurgist (160-210), Septimius Severus (146-211), Geta (189-211), Abercius (193-216), Galen (Claudius Galenus) (129-216), Talmud (188-217), Caracalla (186-217), Macrinus (165-218), Diadumenian (190-218), Philostratus (200-220), Athenaeus of Naucratis (160-220), Elagabalus (203-222), Dio Cassius (165-230), Marius Maximus (160-230), Claudius Aelianus (175-235), Alexander Severus (208-235), Alexander Severus (208-235), Maximinus Thrax (173-238), Gordian I (159-238), Pupienus (178-238), Balbinus (165-238), Gordian II (192-238), Philip II (Philippus II) (238-239), Sextus Empiricus (170-240), Xenophon of Ephesus (170-240), Herodian of Syria (170-240), Gordian III (225-244), Ammonius Saccas (155-245), Pacatian (Pacatianus) (200-248), Jotapian (Jotapianus) (200-249), Philip the Arab (204-249), Philip the Arab (204-249), Julius Africanus (170-250), Babrius (-250-250), Decius Trajan (201-251), Decius (201-251), Herennius Etruscus (227-251), Hostilian (233-251), Trebonianus Gallus (206-253), Aemilianus (207-253), Volusianus (200-253), Uranius (200-254), Origen (185-254), Diogenes Laertius (190-260), Valerian (200-260), Gallienus (218-268), Plotinus (205-270), Asinius Quadratus (200-270), Claudius II (213-270), Quintillus (225-270), Longinus, Cassius Dionysius (213-273), Aurelian (214-275), Tacitus (Marcus Claudius) (200-276), Mani the Prophet (210-276), Florianus (200-276), Heliodorus of Emesa (220-280), Probus (232-282), Carus (230-283), Carinus (240-285), Junianus Justinus (220-290), Carausius (240-293), Allectus (245-296), Diophantus of Alexandria (200-298), Porphyry (234-305), Constantius Chlorus (250-306), Asclepiodotus (250-310), Galerius (250-311), Diocletian (236-316), Hierocles (270-324), Iamblichus of Chalcis (245-325), Amoun (250-325)

CATEGORY 3: HISTORICAL POST-NICAEAN to 5th Century CHRISTIANS

The third category is reserved for christian authors who were alive after the Council of Nicaea. Some of these authors perpetuated further frauds, and strove to eliminate the common knowledge that the nation of christians appeared in chronology with Constantine. In the midst of these authors remains the "christian authodoxy", the victors in the battles of religious and social controversy in the period from 325 until 500 CE. These victorius authors wrote the history that we today regard as accurate. It is the contention of this thesis that some of the following authors censored the public opinion against Constantine's invention of christianity, because the tax-exempt regime of the bishops was literally very big business in those times. Elsewhere, outside of these authors below, land tax by 350 CE had tripled in living memory.

Ammianus comments about this category 3 group c.350 CE "The highways were covered with galloping bishops":

Lactantius (240-320), Alexander of Alexandria (260-326), Sabinus (270-330), Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea (265-340), Commodianus (270-350), Alexander of Lycopolis (280-350), Maximin of Trier (346-352), Donatus Magnus (311-355), Anthony the Great (251-356), Aphrahat/Aphraates (280-367), Hilary of Poitiers (300-368), Athanasius (296-373), Ephraim the Syrian (306-373), Basil the Great (329-379), Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386), Gregory of Nazianzus (329-389), Apollinaris (the Younger) (330-390), Acacius (320-390), Eunomius of Cyzicus (323-393), Gregory of Nyssa (335-395), Philastrius or Philaster of Brescia (345-396), Ambrose (340-397), Didymus the Blind (313-398), Damasus of Rome (320-400), Epiphanius of Salamis (310-403), Sulpicius Severus (363-406), John Chrysostom (347-407), Rufinus (340-410), Theophilus of Alexandria (345-412), Jerome (331-420), Augustine of Hippo (354-430), Philip of Side (380-431), John Cassian (360-435), Philostorgius (368-439), Cyril of Alexandria (378-444), Sozomen (400-450), Socrates Scholasticus (379-450), Vincent of Lérins (390-450), Theodosius II (401-450), Nestorius of Constantinople (386-451), Theodoret (393-457), Leo the Great, Pope (395-461), Hydatius (400-469), Gennadius of Marseilles (440-496)

CATEGORY 4: HISTORICAL POST-NICAEAN to 5th Century PAGANS

The final category is reserved for the pagans of the fourth and fifth century who were alive after the Council of Nicaea. It is this segment of the authorship of antiquity who have not been allowed to tell their story for almost 1700 years. The Emperor Julian wrote three books "Against the Galilaeans" (he never once referred to christians as anything else other than "Galilaeans". This term implied a Hebrew robber, rebel and gangster. It was the common Roman hegemonic term reserved for the Jewish resistance fighters up until Masada in the first century. See Gibbon.) His books were burnt and he was "refuted" by the publication of other works, by the category 3 victors above:

Crispus (299-326), Palamon (270-330), Sopater of Apamea (270-335), Arius of Alexandria (270-336), Constantine I (272-337), Constantine II (316-340), Asterius the Sophist (281-341), Pachomius (292-346), Constans (320-350), Lucius Ampelius (100-350), Magnentius (303-353), Constantius II (317-361), Julian (331-363), Jovian (332-364), Aëtius of Antioch (307-367), Anonymous Scriptores (4?) (312-370), Sallustius (300-370), Marcellus of Ancyra (300-374), Valentinian I (321-375), Pambo (304-375), Valens (328-378), Prohaeresius (300-380), Gratian (359-383), Himerius (315-386), Themistus (317-387), Festus (Rufius?) (320-390), Macarius the Egyptian (300-390), Origen the Priest (associate of "Th (324-390), Eutropius (320-390), Sextus Aurelius Victor (320-390), Macarius the Alexandrian (293-393), Libanius (314-394), Nichomachus Flavianus (344-394), Decimus Magnus Ausonius (310-395), Theodosius I (346-395), Ammianus Marcellinus (325-399), Evagrius Ponticus (345-399), Isodore the Ascetic (318-400), Gelasius of Caesarea (365-400), Oribasius (320-400), Quintus Aurelius Symmachus (340-402), Ammonius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-402), Discorus (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-403), Claudian (350-404), Arcadius (377-408), Melania the Elder (341-410), Paphnutius of Scetis (312-412), Synesius (373-414), Eunapius (347-414), Hypatia of Alexandria (370-415), Euthymius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-420), Eusebius (of "The Tall Brothers") (324-420), Amma Talis (320-420), Isaac of Scetis (350-420), Palladius of Galatia (363-425), Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius (360-430), Plutarch (the Younger) (350-433), Gelasius of Cyzicus (420-475), Stobaeus (420-480), Proclus, Lycaeus (412-487), Moses of Chorene (400-490).

stephan huller · 12-08-2010, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Simon Magus (0-50), Jude (0-60), Barnabas (0-61), Paul (20-65), Matthew (0-70), Mark (0-70), Luke (0-70), John (0-70), Peter (0-70), Clement of Rome (18-98), Ignatius of Antioch (40-117), Aristides the Philosopher (70-134), Basilides (120-140), Marcion (130-140), Papias (110-140), Quadratus (70-140), Agrippa Castor (90-145), Aquila of Sinope (of Pontus) (90-150), Aristo of Pella (130-150), Polycarp (110-155), Valentinus (120-160), Epiphanes (130-160), Marcion of Sinope (110-160), Justin Martyr (150-160), Isidore (140-160), Carpocrates of Alexandria (80-160), Minucius Felix (140-170), Melito of Sardis (165-175), Dionysius of Corinth (165-175), Excerpts of Theodotus (150-180), Athenagoras of Athens (175-180), Apelles (160-180), Apollinaris Claudius (120-180), Julius Cassianus (160-180), Hegesippus (110-180), Heracleon (150-180), Ptolemy (140-180), Pinytus of Crete (130-180), Rhodon (175-185), Theophilus of Caesarea (175-185), Tatian (135-185), Theophilus of Antioch (180-185), Irenaeus of Lyons (175-185), Apollonius (136-186), Anonymous Anti-Montanist (193-193), Maximus of Jerusalem (185-195), Polycrates of Ephesus (130-196), Victor I (189-199), Mathetes (130-200), Diognetus (130-200), Clement of Alexandria (182-202), Apollonius (200-210), Pantaenus (190-210), Serapion of Antioch (200-210), Tertullian (197-220), Bardesanes (180-220), Caius (200-220), Hippolytus of Rome (180-230), Ammonius Saccas (155-245), Octavius of Minucius Felix (160-250), Alexander (of Cappadocia,Jerusalem) (150-250), Cornelius (of Rome) (200-253), Cyprian of Carthage (200-258), Novatian (201-258), Dionysius (of Alexandria) the Great (200-264), Dionysius of Rome (210-268), Gregory Thaumaturgus (212-275), Paul of Samosata (200-275), Hermias (210-280), Malchion (of Antioch) (220-290), Anatolius of Laodicea in Syria (222-290) Victorinus (bishop) of Petau (240-303), Arnobius (245-305), Phileas (Bishop) of Thmuis (250-307), Pamphilus (250-309), Peter of Alexandria (250-311), Methodius (250-311), Miltiades (Pope 311-314)

It is crazy to claim that all these people were false inventions. Have you ever read Irenaeus? No one could artificially establish a work so boring as Against Heresies. It has to be natural.

mountainman · 12-08-2010, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

It is crazy to claim that all these people were false inventions.

The hypothesis might appear crazy, but it explains the fact that if we have any evidence at all for these pre-Nicaean people and their "pre-Nicaean Christian Church" architectural organisation, it is extremely tenditious and ambiguous. Massive amounts of false inventions are to be found in the "HA", a known 4th century "mockumentary" and pseudo-history.

The hypothesis that an author was instructed to prepare a pseudo-history has a great deal of merit with respect to the "Historia Augusta". Yet the hypothesis that an author was instructed to prepare a pseudo-history has not a great deal of merit with respect to the "Historia Ecclesiastica" of Eusebius. I wonder why? Would unexamined tradition have anything to do with it?

Quote:

Have you ever read Irenaeus? No one could artificially establish a work so boring as Against Heresies. It has to be natural.

I have heard that argument applied to the bible.
What's your point? That is is impossible?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-07-2010, 08:00 PM	#117
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Even these examples you cite have nothing in common with the kookiness of your theory. At least there was a Chief Seattle or the Augustan Histories are filled with references to actual people (unless you claim otherwise; maybe you'll claim I don't exist). I am just trying to make sure I understand you correctly. You are saying that every single ante-Nicene Christian figure here on this list is a wholly fictitious person, with no basis in reality right? Jesus, Simon (Peter), Andrew, James, John, Philip, Nathaniel (Bartholomew), Matthew, Thomas, James (son of Alpheus), Simon the Zealot, Judas (son of James), Judas (Iscariot), Thaddaeus, James, the son of Joseph, Mary Magdala, Mary the mother of Jesus, Joseph, James the Brother of Jesus, Mary Salome, Martha, Simon, the son of Cleopas, Cleopas, his father, Joses, Simon, Judah, Barnabas, Manaeus, Ananias, who baptized Paul, Cephas, who preached at Antioch, Joseph, the senator, Nicodemus, the Archon, Nathaniel, the chief scribe, Justus (i.e. Joseph, called Barsabba, Silas, Judah, John (Mark), Mnason, who received Paul, Manael, foster-brother of Herod, Simon, called Niger, Jason (see Acts xvii. 5-9), Rufus (see Rom. xvi. 13), Alexander, Simon, the Cyrenian, their father, Lucius, the Cyrenian, Judah (mentioned in Acts), Judah, who is called Simon, Eurion (Orion), the splay-footed, Thorus, Thorisus, Zabdon, Zakron, Philip, whose three (sic) daughters prophesied (see Acts xxi. 9), Stephen, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon; Parmenas; Nicolaus (Acts vi. 5), Andronicus, the Greek (Rom. xvi. 7), Titus, Timothy, the following were with Peter in Rome -Hermas, Plighta, Patrobas, Asyncritus, Hermas, Criscus (II Tim. iv. 10), Milichus, Crito, Simon, Gaius, who received Paul, Abrazon, Apollos, Cerinthus, Simon, Levi, Bar-Kubba, Cleon, Hymenaeus, Candarus, Clithon, Demas, Narcissus, Slîkîspus, Thaddaeus, Maruntha, Luke the Physician, Apollos, the elect, Ampelius, Urbanus, Stachys, Publius, Aristobulus, Stephen, Herodion, the son of Narcissus, Olympas, Mark the Evangelist, Addai, Aggai, Mar Mari, Jude, Josephus, Timothy, Titus, Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Papias, Matthias, Quadratus of Athens, Aristides, Basilides, Valentinus, Marcion, Aristo of Pella, Epiphanes, Mathetes, Diognetus, Ptolemy, Isidore, Fronto, Justin Martyr, Heracleon, Tatian, Claudius Apollinaris, Apelles, Julius Cassianus, Octavius of Minucius Felix, Carpus, Melito of Sardis, Hegesippus, Dionysius of Corinth, Lucian of Samosata, Athenagoras of Athens, Irenaeus of Lyons, Rhodon, Theophilus of Caesarea, Celsus, Galen, the Scillitan Martyrs, Theophilus of Antioch, Apollonius, Bardesanes, Hippolytus of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Maximus of Jerusalem, Polycrates of Ephesus, Pantaenus, Anonymous Anti-Montanist, Abercius, Tertullian, Serapion of Antioch, Apollonius, Caius of Rome, Philostratus, Origen of Alexandria, Ambrose of Alexandria, Cyprian, Novatian, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Julius Africanus, Anatolius and Minor Writers, Methodius, Arnobius, Anatolius, Alexander of Cappadocia, Theognostus of Alexandria, Pierius of Alexandria, Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Theodotus, Mar Jacob, Sharbil, Barsamya, Habib the Martyr, Guria, Shamuna, Mara, Son of Serapion, [bishops of Rome] Linus, Anacletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, Anicetus, Soterus, Eleutherius, Victor, Zephirinus, Calixtus/Callistus, Urban, Pontianus, Anterius, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius I, Stephen I, Sixtus II, Dionysius of Rome, Felix I, Eutychianus, Caius/Gaius I, Marcellinus, Marcellus I, Eusebius of Rome, Melchiades/Miltiades, [bishops of Alexandria] Anianus, Avilius, Kedron, Primus, Justus, Eumenes, Mark II, Celadion, Agrippinus, Julian, Demetrius, Heraclas, Dionysius, Maximus, Theonas, Peter of Alexandria, Achillas [bishops of Antioch] Euodius, Hero I, Cornelius, Eros/Heros II, Theophilus, Maximus I/Maximianus, Serapion, Ascelpiades/Aslipiades, Philetus, Zebinnus/Zebinus/Zenobius, Babylas, Fabius, Demetrius/Demetrian, Paul of Samosata, Domnus I/Dmonus, Timaeus, Cyril, Tyrannos/Tyrannion, Viitalis/Vitalius, [bishop of Jerusalem] James the Brother, Symeon/Simon I, Ioustos/Judas/Justus I, Zakheos/Zakhaios/Zacchaeus, Tobias, Beniamin/Veniamin/Benjamin I, John/Ioannis I, Matthew/Matthias I, Phillip, Senekas/Seneca, Ioustos/Justus II, Levis/Levy/Levi, Efrem/Efraim/Ephres, Joseph I, Judas, Marcus/Markos/Mark, Cassianos/Kassianos/Cassian, Pouplios/Publius, Maximus I, Ioulianos/Julian I, Gaios/Gaius I, Simmahos/Symmachus, Gaios/Gaius II, Ioulianos/Oialis/Julian II, Capion/Kapion/Capito, Maximus II, Antonios/Antoninus, Oualis/Oialis/Valens, Dolihianos/Dolichian, Narkissos/Narcissus II, Dios, Germanion, Gordios, Alexander, Mazabanis/Mazabanes, Imeneos/Ymenaios/Hymenaeus, Zamvdas/Zambdas/Zabdas, Ermon/Hermo, [bishops of Byzantium] Stachys the Apostle, Onesimus, Polycarpus I, Plutarch, Sedecion, Diogenes, Eleutherius, Felix, Polycarpus II, Athendodorus, Euzois, Laurence, Alypius, Pertinax, Olympians, Mark I, Philadelphus, Ciriacus I, Castinus, Eugenius I, Titus, Dometius, Rufinus I, Probus, Metrophanes

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.